Options
Would you have the balls to do this with your bank?
g-bhxu
Posts: 2,594 Forum Member
✭✭✭
:mad::mad::mad:
The law (The Social Security Administration Act 1992 Section 187) states that a bank cannot take bank charges out of your bank account if you recieve certain benefits into your bank account.
Despite this, my bank refuses to give a refund for the charges (£260) that they've taken from me over the past 3 years.
I know that I've a direct debit going out on Monday and it will leave me overdrawn by about £260.
I've written them a letter stating:-
1) The unauthorized overdraft will only be paid back when they refund me the £260 that they've illegally taken from my account
2) I don't accept liability for any bank charges that are incurred because I'm going to be overdrawn.
3) After Monday, any deposits are for my use only and not to be used to pay off the overdraft. e.g. Incapacity Benefit, BGC, cash over the counter, etc
4) I should be able to use the rest of the features of my bank account as normal. e.g. direct debits, pay bills, etc
The law (The Social Security Administration Act 1992 Section 187) states that a bank cannot take bank charges out of your bank account if you recieve certain benefits into your bank account.
Despite this, my bank refuses to give a refund for the charges (£260) that they've taken from me over the past 3 years.
I know that I've a direct debit going out on Monday and it will leave me overdrawn by about £260.
I've written them a letter stating:-
1) The unauthorized overdraft will only be paid back when they refund me the £260 that they've illegally taken from my account
2) I don't accept liability for any bank charges that are incurred because I'm going to be overdrawn.
3) After Monday, any deposits are for my use only and not to be used to pay off the overdraft. e.g. Incapacity Benefit, BGC, cash over the counter, etc
4) I should be able to use the rest of the features of my bank account as normal. e.g. direct debits, pay bills, etc
0
Comments
(sorry it's off topic)
I don't quite get your meaning.
Its worth a shot, though 4) might be stretching it a bit....
actual longterm outcome: banks refuse to give anyone on these benifits a bank account
Have you actually had a judgement made in your favour, which states that the bank has taken your money in error and it is obliged to refund the money. Or is it a case that you think they have done so, but they have not agreed that this is the case?
If it is the former, then I would really suggest you progress your entitlement to the refund with the proper authorities and also inform them of any additional charges you receive as a result of their refusal of refunding the money.
If it is the latter, then I am afraid the most likely outcome will be somewhere along the lines of.
1) they do not recognise an "illegal" removal of money from your account. Your "unauthorised" overdraft however breaks the condition of your bank account. Result you will be charged, if they allow the direct debit to go through in the first place.
2) As above, the overdraft is unauthorised and charges will be made as per the terms and conditions of the account.
3) All deposits will be used to service the debts and charges of your account.
4) You may get restrictions placed on the account to make sure you do not get into the overdraft again.
If you are in the latter situation, I would really suggest you progress your claim through the legal channels.
Many people have, and many more will, rightfully claim back some of the billions of pounds banks have stolen from people. After all, isn't taking money without permission the definition of stealing? Dam, even the government have to ask for money from you, they can't just take it like banks do. Even if the banks had the right to impose these charges (which, legally, they don't. At least to the extent to which they have) they should have to ask for it and pursue it through the courts if they don't get it? It's criminal i tells ya!
As Chipmunk says this will probably mean that banks will alter current policies, including things like charging to use cashpoints (esp. abroad) and many other ninja charges, to wring more money from us. Greedy buggers.
Section 187 of The Social Security Administration Act 1992, reads as follows:-
link to source
Sorry, but whereabouts does it say anything about bank charges ?
I think it all depends on your definition of the word "inalienable". You may be right, but from reading the above, I'm not at all sure.
187 Certain benefit to be inalienable (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, every assignment of or charge on
i.e. the bank is taking money what the DWP says I need to live off for bank charges.
Incidentally, the charges were incurred because the DWP decided that despite having a serious heart condition I was fit enough to go back to work and forced to live off just £47 a week for 6 months!
And as usual, the DWP won't admit it's their fault I incurred the charges
Yes, but is that at source ?
Once it's in someone's bank it surely cannot be distinguished from other funds.
That said, I still don't blame you for kicking up a stink, and I hope you're right, and win your case. At the very least you've given the bank a headache to resolve :cool:
It was the one that ferried the contestants to their start positions, yeah (not actually the main 'Interceptor' one). Prior to that it was the skyrunner helicopter in Treasure Hunt.
OP maybe you need to manage your money better? £260 must add up to quite a few times that you've gone over your limit. to be fair to the banks they do tell you what will happen if you go over.
2 Direct Debits.
The first for £34 to TV Liciencing (would have took me £20 overdrawn), the second for £296 to the bank (would have took me £290 overdrawn.)
Guess which one was paid and which one was not paid?
I agree, do kick up a stink.
But I would just like to empasise what I said before. If it has been agreed by a legal body that in your case that they owe you the money. Then chase the relevant bodies for the money.
If you have not had a case heard and it is your interpretation of the law compared to the banks. Then I would stongly recommend pursuing the approproate channels and not taking unauthorised overdrafts (if at all possible) to get back what you think is owed to you. It will end up with fees and would probably not act in your favour.
I think you may be misunderstanding the specific meaning of 'charge' here. I am not a lawyer - but to me this looks like it is relating to bankruptcy style proceedings. A 'charge' over assets is similar to a mortgage on a house (which is one type of 'charge') - if you don;t pay the lender can claim back their asset over which they have a 'charge'. The meaning is probably that after bankruptcy no one can take these benefits from you to pay other bills covered by a legal charge.
Nothing to do with bank charges on bank accounts.
I cannot believe that every parent in the country receiving child benefit was exempt from having to meet the terms and conditions of their bank accounts without incurring bank charges.
(Though I do agree that some of these charges are excessive, and you may have a valid claim - ,may be better to get advice from somewhere like CAB or a site like moneysavingsexpert.com before firing off a letter that could result in you being asked to close your account).