Quote:
Originally Posted by modelimages
one of my customers is a senior banker for natwest, i told him about this thread and all these people getting money back, most of his reply was unprintable on a forum however the gist of his reply was A. you went over an agreed limit and were charged in accordance with the terms and conditions you agreed to. B. it costs a lot of money to have somebody sitting behind a desk sending out letters to people, his quote was that it costs £5k just to put someone behind a natwest desk, he should know he pays for all the infrastructure costs.
i did point out that if the banks had such a strong case for these charges why didn't they put up a fight, his answer "don't want any bad publicity".
|
I work for a bank and know what he said is just garbage. The problem arises because banks have used fees as a stream of income for years, and the financial services authority take a dimn view on this. Charges must cover the cost incurred to collect the money that justifies the charges.
He will say that as he want his company to perform well, the more customers do this the less his company makes. The same applies to me, my bonus come the end of the year depends on how profitable my portfolios are, and my portfolios make more money by applying these charges. If these charges are taken away from banks they will inevitably make less money. The problem you have is if customers continue to insist on these refunds the banks will punish us by other means.
Take First Direct, they are now charging customers a fee if they dont have a certain amount in there account within a 1 month period. You will see more and more of these charges being thought of over the coming months/years if we insist on the fees being refunded.
Catch 22. Should "Good" customers have to pay for those that dont manage their finances well? But do the fees justify the charges imposed.
Everyone will have their point of view, but im sure views will be based on their own experience