I have a Co-op Credit Card. A few months ago, I cancelled the 'Cardholder Protection Insurance' as it no longer covered me. Three months down the lane, I noted that they were still changing me for this Insurance. Did they treat me in a similar manner to those who erred against them - i.e. Paid me a sum similar to that they would have charged me if I went into overdraft? No, they just refunded the sums deducted without adding any interest of saying sorry. They need to brush up of the 'English' Language - their interpretation of fairness is not ethical.........or is it? Co-op I am listening!

Anthony WALKER, Louth, Lincolnshire

My partner and I have a legitimate and serious complaint about our bank that goes back 4 years and has been compounded subsequently by very fishy 'consultancy fees'. It came to a head when the Sunday Telegraph published an article about a 'rogue banker' in May of this year. The bank's attitude to both the article and our complaint (which has cost us thousands of pounds) has been to ignore us and then to issue final demands for money we don't owe them.
Clearly they know that there are serious problems on the account - the bank manager was suspended and "retired" and the article relating to his conduct said he had cost the bank tens of millions of pounds. Today, I think we have finally begun to find out the true situation - but we found out from a journalist, not from the bank. Personally I think they are just bully boys in smart suits. Even the CEO of the bank will not reply to us. Can that be called good business - does that comply with the FSA letter? No. They really don't care.

Nikki Turner, Cambridge, Cambs.

Going back about 3-4 years, I was visiting my girlfriend (at the time) and decided to buy some perfume for her while onboard the aircraft (Easyjet). I thought that using my credit-card would be fine as I had the money in my account to cover it. I was informed however that my credit-card had been declined so paid with my debit-card. What I didnt know though is your supposed to get a receipt still, showing the card was denied... and the money had been stolen by a hostess to buy herself some perfume.

Unknowing that the money had been taken from my credit-card, I withdrew some cash from it - thinking that their machine couldnt read it for some reason which put me overdrawn. I got an overdraft charge and when I transfered the money from my bank instantly to pay for it... it JUST cleared into the black again.

Interest got applied to the account which again forced me over and another charge, followed by late-payment charge for paying the current-account... now 3-4 years in debt :/

Daryl Knight, Gateshead, UK

Fleecing customer what u expect this is our culture we as a nation and goverment have been thiving from the poorest people on this earth for centuries. Free slave labour, free thieved materials minerals any company or country would become wealthy. Where does all that thieved gold come from stashed in the bank of england coffers hey come on at one time the whole parliament was full of slavetrader and thives. Nowadays the thieving systems are so well organised by parasitic institution,companies and certain goverments that all u have got no idea Dont be surprised the banks and all the other companies are thiving from the customer. This is our culture we have cultivated over centuries.
Our parasitic way of life and mentality of wanting to exploit everything and anything for profit is destroying our humanity and our habitat. a nit can only suck till the blood finishes
dont worry the end is near only the sun and the mountains live forever. Al from southport

allanayden, southport,

I have also work in financial services for most of my adult life and believe in giving excellant service regardless of whether I make a 'sale 'or not. Unfortunately for me the Bank doesn't see it like that. Although my manager agrees I give good customer service I have been told the job has changed and my position as a personal banker is now purely a selling role. As my sales were, in their eyes low ,I was but on a performance plan and told if I didnt acheive my target I would be given a formal warning and face possible dismissal. I have recently been taken off the plan as I'am now at over 80% of my target. I no longer enjoy my job, feel stressed all the time especially if I don't make my daily target. I too am looking for another job as I also have had enough.

sue, west wickham, kent

When Mr.Brown first took office some ten years ago, I wrote to him complaining of the indescriminate, lying, actions of Banks and Credit poviders; particularly the exhorbitant interest rates: the poorer you are, low credit scored, the more likeley it is that you will pay for the perceived privilage of obtaining credit.
Politeley, Mr. Brown informed me that it was on his agenda and something he would look into. Nothing has changed.

My life has been ruined by a lying Lloyds TSB bank manger, regarding personal guarantees i.e. a more favourable approach to my borrowing needs would be forthcoming if I was to give them my personal guarantee

Michael, London,

I can not believe the arrogance of these people who think anyone who goes overdrawn is stupid and can't manage their account, 10 years ago my partner left me and our daughter, and refused to pay anything towards our keep and home which was subsequently repossessed, I am still being chased for the £8000 decfict from the sale of the house, I have never been able to get my account in the black, as I don't have a good credit score I am not able to get an authorised overdraft, I have tried my best to keep a roof over our heads but unfortunately I cannot do this without overdrawing each month, maybe when I get my charges back I will be able to get there and be like all you sensible people that have never been overdrawn

Jane, Lincs, UK

I have worked in the financial services, banking and investment arena for the whole of my adult life, and there has been a sea change in attitudes over the last 10 years. I can tell you without a shadow of doubt, that all institutions and the majority of individuals within them, only care about extracting the maximum fee / commission / charges / interest or penalties from their customers. Customer service only exists in so far as it will allow you to extract yet more money from your unfortunate clients. Those who seek to defend the banks, you haven't a clue of the reality of how they view their customers. The banks think they are a retailer - everytime you come in, you buy something. Staff who don't acheive are pushed out. If I still had the misfortune to work in a bank, £100,000 to a bond would lead to £8,300 commission for the bank, for maybe 4 hrs work - I'm currently changing career as I've had enough !

Dave, Northants,

Talking about banks, how about this? I'm a pensioner living in Germany and my pension is paid into the Halifax. In order to access my pension via an ATM, I have used a debit card. Everything was perfect until the Halifax decided to put a stop on all debit cards being used by their clients in Germany. Obviously, this must have included tourists. The reason quoted was: 'there has been so much misuse of debit cards in Germany that we decided to stop them' Of course, the mighty Halifax didn't consider it at all necessary to advise their clients rather left them with9ut money! Imagine the state of affairs if their employees were quite suddenly and without prior warning left in the lurch.
Response from the Halifax: 'we're defending your interests!!!'

My advice to all and sundry is quite simply, never trust a banker. I adopted this approach many years ago and believe me, it has paid dividends (excuse the pun).

Kenneth, Hamburg, Germany

David Tudor, so how come the banks are allowed to put you over their set OD limit on your account by 100s of charges alone?
ie OD limit say £200 bank charges bring your OD to £600 then accout closed!
Give me a break! That is one rule for them another for us!
Its theft "pure-and-simple" AND HAS TO BE STOPPED!!

Charles Linskaill, Edinburgh, UK

David Tudor, so how come the banks are allowed to put you over their set OD limit on your account by 100s of charges alone?
ie OD limit say £200 bank charges bring your OD to £600 then accout closed!
Give me a break! That is one rule for them another for us!
Its theft "pure-and-simple" AND HAS TO BE STOPPED!!

Linskaill, Edinburgh, UK

..may have just hit "a blip" in that they will find it easier to rectify than huge charges pulling them down and, for those who persistently flout the rules the 10-20% of a £700 refused mortgage payment would make them take thier finances seriously. the other thing to metion is that there is no substiute for humanity and..in an age where the computer and online financial business is very easy and convenient, there seems to be no comparison to human contact and I believe we should all be using a little more face to face communication to sort our problems out. This goes as much, if not more for the faceless banking industry. I wonder how much more business a bank would recieve if they set up a small bank with these ethics. "Got a problem? come and see the manager , need a couple of days overdraft, come and see the manager. Probably a damn sight more happy cusomers than there are today. Hmmm....do I see a career opportunity here?
Ann

Ann , St Neots,

Why are the banks being singled out for the nation's combined vitriol? Paying a penalty when you exceed your overdraft limit - a limit which was known to, and agree by you -is entirely reasonable. It is no different from paying a parking fine for exceeding one's allotted time in a car park, or returning a book to the library after the agreed rental period.

Methinks that this crusade against the banks is nothing more than a bandwagon of greed initiated by those who believe that profit is a dirty word, and fuelled by hordes of Daily Mail-reading opportunists looking to make a 'quick buck' from their own inability to control a bank account.

What next? Shall we all sue Customs & Excise for the return of the fines levied when we were late with our VAT returns?

David Tudor, Orpington, Kent

Due to unfavorable comments I don't reveal my name:
I've undergone thrice Lloyds' malpractice. At the very outset of my relation with them they lied to me they hadn't got any non-fee current account thinking they could fool a foreigner into going for superfluous products. Secondly I paid-in a pretty substantial amount in cash in one branch and coincidently I had to draw a check in another branch and heard that the pay-in transaction hadn't been recorded - money wasn't there. Fortunatly I held on to the reciept and it cost me just nerves and delays.
Thirdly and less importantly I was refused a double transaction of paying-in and paying out thru transfer toward my electricity bills so that I could have a reminder in their database aside from a piece of paper. Instead I got just a reciept but not a mention on my billings

name withheld, Worcester, UK

Not Realy. There are over charged for being idiots who cant manage their own accounts. I see people like this all the time, they are victims for a reason. What they need to do is sort themselves out and stop blaming the world because they are losers.

Jude, portsmouth, hampshire

Ray Allen - what a font of kindness and human understanding you are. People can get into trouble for all kinds of reasons and the vampirist nature of some banks, just compounds the problems that your fellow citizen might have. People can lose their jobs overnight, especially in the North of England, ( I assume that the scrapheap is an unknown place in the South East where you appear to reside). The kind of anal meaness that your comment engenders, gives an excellent example of why banks feel so free to fleece people. Although, understandably, banks are not meant to be charitable institutions, they make plenty out of people during the good times. They should be more sympathetic in the bad.

Judy , Liverpool, england

Banks are daylight robbers.
I was mis-sold an investment by the Halifax, and when I complained, the bank simply denied what their own financial advisor had told me would be the worst case loss.
It's a serious measure of social breakdown if nothing that banks do can be trusted.

Steve Moxon, sheffield,

sir
I find it strange that we spend money in the form of overdrafts and credit cards and when we are charged for these services we complain about the costs.Having never used an overdraft facility or credit cards i believe that if you only spend money that you can afford or that you actually have then these charges will not be incurred.We would all be better of if only people lived within their means . The banks would not like this as it would hit them were it hurts.Unfortuatley most people live on negative finance so they have to pay the price.

d j smith, westwood,

I agree entirely with Mike in Bournemouth. I'm now retired but have never been a high earner, yet I've never had trouble with my bank because I've always kept a careful watch on my balance and adjusted my spending accordingly. Banks do publish the charges you'll incur for exceeding agreed overdrafts etc. The danger with bashing the banks is that they'll just charge everybody more for running their accounts, and it's the careful among us who will then be disadvantaged.

Barry, Wallington, UK

Ray of St Albans you've completely missed the point about why customers are complaining about bank charges. Under the law as it currently stands a bank is allowed to charge a customer an administration charge if that customer goes overdrawn without permission, for example, and the bank sends the customer a letter. The administration charge, however, should only reflect the cost to the bank of sending the letter, which is about £8.00. Nobody would disagree with this. Unfortunately, the greedy banks were charging customers around £35.00 for sending the letters,which were often computer generated in any event. This amounted to an unlawful penalty charge by the banks. This is what customers are complaining about.

Darren Hughes, Wrexham,

This is a symptom of the new UK, greed overtakes all sense of fairness. Banks, Railways, 0870 numbers etc . Huge profits must be justified.

Shah, London,

We finally got a substantial sum refunded from HSBC equivalent to every penny of charges ever levied over 6 years and a further 100 pounds on top. When we complained we used the standard letters from the 'Which' website.

1: First letter sent registered post was returned with a note saying our signature was wrong!

2: second letter sent registered post prompted the bank to send us, unasked for, a stack o statements 3 inches thick but not the summary of all charges on the account over the previous 6 years as requested.

3: After we had gone through all the statements and itemised charges onto a spreadsheet and sent the request for the total (including a printout) by registered post, was offerered about 1/3rd of what we asked for within 48 hours of posting letter

4: We sent a rejection and a further registered post letter and received the full offer within three days which we accepted.

Be persistent! I am now pursuing another bank whose customer service and security is woeful!

Mr Booker, Rotherham, UK

I can't speak for other banks but our manager at RBS seemed reasonable enough when we queried what we considered undue overdraft charges, he listened, dealt with our aggravation politely, assessed our situation fairly and offered us compensation within 24hrs without any threats or intimidation.

There was an issue with direct debit dates wandering over the course of a year. He recognized we weren't being reckless with their money and that it was a technical error and corrected it. I do however believe that there should be a penalty for recklessness, on both parts. As to what it should must be left to the banks and their customers, such agreements are part of their offering that differentiates them from other banks. The industry needs that freedom to remain competitive and offer good deals to responsible clients who don't go over agreed limits knowingly. A deal is a deal, take responsibility folks.

So far RBS has been honest and reliable - and no.. I wasn't put up to this

Winston McSmith, Edinbugh,

Murdo has a good point. There is a strict separation between the bank's own money any the depositors' money
An agreed overdraft is one thing, but if you go beyond the agreed limit then you are taking other people's money without their permission and without demonstrating the ability or the wish to repay.
If you keep your account in credit, and don't pay bank charges, then it is your money that is being taken by this minority. How else do you suggest the banks should protect your interest?

Richard, Dunstable,

It's not the going over drawn and being charged a fair fee people are complaining about.....

It's when the bank charges you £60 for going £1 over drawn because of IT'S charges, and then charges you 3 or 4 days in a row £30 BEFORE you've even got the first letter. These are the charges people are trying to reclaim.

Lee, Canary Wharf, London

Taking someone else's money without permission is called stealing. Frankly, people incurring the fees should count themselves lucky that it only costs them £30.

Rubbish, With the exception of unauthorised overdrafts by use of a guaranteed cheque, all borrowings are at the banks discretion. They are perfectly able to refuse payment. The fact that a bank charges up to £39.00 for refusing to pay an item as small as a few pounds is an outrage!

David, Halifax, UK.

Its not before time the "heavy-hand-off-the-Law" came down on our banks. One comment on here says "going overdrawnt" is taking the banks money, but how-come the banks themselfs put you into "MASSIVE" overdraft with their charges on the same account?
Now thats what I call "stealing from us"!

Charles Linskaill, Edinburgh, UK

It is amazing that the financial watchdog that is supposed to protect consumer rights and has been the first port of call for many consumers reclaiming bank charges, has suddenly jumped ship now the matter has come to the High Court.

Having threatened my bank with an "Obtaining money transfer by deception" complaint to the Police, which carries an unlimited fine and the possibility of a 10 year gaol term, I find they are perfectly amenable to providing me with a service on my terms i.e. informing me by phone when charges might be levied so I can correct the situation before I do get charged. I still pay an acceptable level of interest on my overdraft to pay for that service and not the doubled interest rate that gets levied for exceeding my agreed limit plus the rip off penalty charge. I can accept with difficulty the doubled interest rate, but not both.

It just goes to prove what can be done if "Customer Service" is properly applied and how much bank customers are being scammed.

George Brink, Hinckley, Leics, United Kingdom

I work for a bank and whenever people find out they seem to want to tell me off about charges. All I can say is that for people who usually run their account well or people who get charges because of charges I have alot of sympathy. However the people who seem to complain are the ones who blatantly abuse the facilities offered. They have hundreds or thousands of pounds of charges because they spend money that isnt theirs. If you steal off the bank what do you expect? If you stole off anyone else you would be arrested.

Laura, Newcastle,

Its not before time the "heavy-hand-off-the-Law" came down on our banks. One comment on here says "going overdrawnt" is taking the banks money, but how-come the banks themselfs put you into "MASSIVE" overdraft with their charges on the same account?
Now thats what I call "stealing from us"!

Charles Linskaill, Edinburgh, UK

Most of the major banks in the U K that have either been around for 200 years, or which are descended from amalgamations of those institutions, made their early profits from the slave trade and the arms trade as it was then. I am astonished that anyone is surprised that they regularly lie to, and cheat , customers. This is just part of 'real' banking ethics, used by people in a position to lawfully extort money from the public using any device they can. Their myth of respectability was never earned, just a facade put on by their senior employees whilst they pursued ever bigger profits.
If the Government really cares about the voters then they will punish this type of behaviour and respond to the public's rightful indignation. Most of the money is clawed from those who can least afford it - the people with insufficient in their accounts to prevent the occaisional slipping into overdraft. They Banks should be ashamed and the Government should come down hard on this trickery.

Riley, Kiev, Ukraine

I was charged £30 twice (i.e., £60.00 in all) by Nationwide. They only had to cover the overdraft I caused for about 10 minutes to half an hour. I had the funds in my e account, but not in my flexaccount at the moment the funds were deducted., and I quickly transferred sufficient funds to cover, on line. If the overdraft charge should relate to what it has cost them, then this is unfair charging. I wrote to them, assured them that I do not go overdrawn as a rule, have been with them 20 years plus so they could verify this, and do not believe in using the bank's money for weeks and then being surprised that they wish to charge me for doing so. Despite this they refunded only one £30 fee, and I have had no success at all in ringing them, getting only the usual piped music for ages. No discretion was used , no true managerial skills, and standard letters were sent. They will now lose my custom.

C Economides, Bournemouth,

It's obvious - the main complaint isn't that customers are charged for exceeding their overdraft agreement of the occasional direct debit bouncing and having to sort that out; the issue is that £39 for exceeding your overdraft by, in some cases, a very small amount is unfair. It does NOT cost the bank the amount of money they have been charging for going over credit limits and overdraft limits. They have been shown to be making profit on these charges and should just accept the recommendation of a £12 admin fee that they should also waive if the amount overdrawn is insignificant (ie. a couple of pounds).
I have to say I'm not at all surprised though, my bank have been awful. For example drawing £130,000 out of my account (that had very little in it) and not flagging up that something had gone wrong with their system. It's about time a "responsible" bank made clear they are a cut above the rest

David, Reading,

I have no trouble with bank charges as long as they call them fines because thats what they are. Its when they call them administration charges and the like, it would then have to be less than 1 pound because thats all it will cost banks to send a letter.

Adrian, Norwich,

Without any warning my former husband stopped paying maintenance in breach of a court order. I was unaware that the maintenance had not gone into my bank account and when I checked my balance three days after the maintenance should have gone in I was over £300 overdrawn, all of which was made up of bank charges. The bank had returned several direct debits and charged me for each one. Although I did manage to get the maintenance started again, my solicitor informed me that I had no right to ask the court to award me the return of my bank charges from my former husband. It took months to get back to where I was and I ended up with a damaged credit rating.

M A Richards, Lincoln, UK

I've signed up for many bank accounts in my time and I have never been warned at the time of opening the account that I would be subject to ridiculous overinflated fees

Tarot, Cheltenham,

Its not before time the "heavy-hand-off-the-Law" came down on our banks. One comment on here says "going overdrawnt" is taking the banks money, but how-come the banks themselfs put you into "MASSIVE" overdraft with their charges on the same account?
Now thats what I call "stealing from us"!

Linskaill, Edinburgh, UK

Overhead costs of sending a charge for being overdrawn, are 1 sheet of a4 paper, and pressing return on the computer that combines the amount, name, address and bill.
When the contract is under question, it is the manner as well as the fine print that has to be examined, the world is not simply black and white, it has colours also.
So integrity, sincerity, bullying, and gross overcharging with intimidation that were not written into the contract become variables in the challenge. That's what is egregiously invidious in the whole thing about abuse of power against the weak. SO the next time, you construct the argument “If I don't pay my electricity bill I get cut off; “ try adding, a £40 bill, lack of integrity, insulting your intelligence and see how you feel about the simple print in a contract.

Tony, London, UK

"" Taking someone else's money without permission is called stealing. Frankly, people incurring the fees should count themselves lucky that it only costs them £30. ""

But this clearly isn't stealing, tho, is it? If your balance hits zero, and then your gas supplier (for example) tries to take money off you, the bank has the option of saying "No... Actually this person doesn't have any money, in their account, we can't pay you." Do they do this? No, they'll hand the cash out to anyone who asks for it, and then go to the 'customer' and ask for fines. If the bank takes it upon themselves to spend non-existent money (of their clients) then it is the bank that should be at fault.

Matt, Guildford,

Mike Gilbert isn't living in the real world if he thinks bank charges are made only against "spentdthrift individuals blatantly misusing the system". With the complexity of modern living, including variable direct debits it's extemely easy to go over your limit without realising it. It isn't as if the banks will call you to tell you, letting you set your balance right before their charging kicks in. The charges themselves are punative, not representative of the actual cost to the bank, which is probably a few pence at most and most probably illegal.

Robinson, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire

It is idiotic for people to refer to "law of contract" as if it would be legally binding if the terms of the contract itself are misleading, illegally or unfairly applied.
The banks must provide a transparent contract that illustrates exactly where the amounts their clients were charged was actually spent. This exercise in simple bookkeeping shouldn't be too difficult to do for a financial institution. Unless, of course, the charges levied are unfair and the banks have misled their clients.

Arj, Halifax, UK

You accidently overdraw by £25 and the bank charges you £30. Two following direct debits, totalling £22, each receive a charge of £30. In 7 days you can get £90 in charges, and you think this is reasonable. And of course you are £90 down the followig month. You don't eat or do you not pay the mortgage or what? I have just enough money to live on each month - but now have £180 in charges over 5 weeks. It will get worse until I can find a way to raise money. This where bank charges are wrong, £30 a month could be managed, £30 an item cannot.

Peggy W, Blyth, England

Sir,
Whilst having sympathy with people who go into the red (in the past my own finances have often been a source of sleepless nights) I am more than happy with the free banking that I now enjoy. If the banks are forced to reduce charges for unauthorised overdrafts they will have only one way to make up the deficit - charge all customers for the privledge of banking with them.
I think the charges for small transgressions are over the top but if the banks make it clear what will hapen when you go into the red no one can complain when they actually get charged.

Alan Sutton, Leicester, UK

The 'unauthorised overdraft' is a complete myth. Short of an armed robbery, nobody gets money out of any bank without their authorisation. Do you really think you can somehow fool the bank's computer into making a payment that isn't 'authorised'? I think not. Regardless of the level of your overdraft, If the bank make any payment they do so because they choose to, and it is preposterous to suggest that the resulting balance is in some way 'unauthorised'.

Robert Cumming, Dunfermline, Scotland

To those who say they do not understand what people are whining about and they should pay charges - if you had bothered to get your facts right you will find nobody who claims back their charges disagrees with the banks being able to charge for going over an overdraft limit. the fact remains that banks are only allowed to charge the amount it actually costs them to administer the returned d/d or standing order. This is believed to be in the region of £2-£3, not £30+ which the banks charge. Until the banks come clean about how much it actually costs them for this 'service' then they will continue to be faced with court claims for the total costs. It is the banks who are 'stealing' fromtheir customers, not the other way round. Do you know of any other business who is allowed to gain access to your bank account to pilfer whatever they feel like?

carole, Peterborough, UK

I'm well are of the law of contract, as are the judges who have consistently found against the finance companies.

Penalty fees not related to the actual costs incurred are unlawful. Any contract clause at odds with this, is null and void, and can be safely ignored.

Simple. What part of that is so difficult to understand ?

John, London, UK

I am satisfied that the last 3 posts I made, are being filtered. Omissions that are significant, when combined with acts, ( those that do get printed) show design and purpose in the function of the will of the editing team. This is biased!

Tony, London, UK

To say that everyone knows what they are signing up for is misleading and inacurate. Banks changes their charges requently, you would have to move your banks account round every few months to obtain the current best deal and lets face it it's faw to complicated to keep moving your bank account to make it worthwhile. Also circumstances change.

When my husband was made redundant we contacted the bank to ask for a bit of leyway while we sorted out payments, they told us to get lost! My husband was a very high earner, but as soon as that regular salary stopped hitting the account they weren't intersted. We told them that his final salary would be hitting our account 1 day late, they charged us £224 in one day for paying our direct debits!!!! Then they charged us £80 per month for not paying in the minimum £1000 for the whole time he was unemployed! Try and tell anyone that that is fair charging!!!!!!

Lisa, Guildford,

Substitute the word 'councils', for 'banks', and 'parking challenges' for 'overcharge challenges', and you have the same matrix pattern that conforms to the principle of the abuse of position by the powerful against the weak. There are some high court challenges there too very soon.
The only difference is that councils are now government agencies, (.gov.uk ?) so the challenge is harder because the forces of reaction are stronger and coordinated. Just a little opinion.

Tony, London, UK

David Brown asks whether "these people" have heard of the law of contract; but I ask whether David Brown has ever heard of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts (UTCC) Regulations 1999.

(For the benefit of Mr Brown and others: unfair contract terms are unenforceable in law; and the UTCC Regulations, because they are Regulations, rather than a Directive, have to be enforced in their entirety by the government of each EU Member State, without any omission, variation or individual interpretation.)

The UTCC Regs state that a contract term may be regarded as unfair if it has the effect of "requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation". Note that the contract term does not have to be drafted so that it states explicitly that it requires "any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation". It merely needs to have that effect. Clearly, these bank charges meet that criterion.

Henry Peters, London, UK

If all claims are now suspended til the outcome of the test case,then surely all fee's/charges made by the banks should also be suspended til that time.

Andrew Edwards, Herefordshire, U K

Here's what happened to myself. I have an account with NatWest. I only had a small amount in the account. A direct debit request came through even though I had asked NatWest and the requestor to cancel it. They bounced the direct debit request and charged me £30 or so for doing that. Because I did'nt have £30 in the account they took the £30 anyway and put me into overdraft AND then charged me £30 on top for having an unauthorised overdraft even though it was themselves who put me into such overdraft deliberately. I have no sympathy for such tactics.

Simon, London, UK

Some readers make me laugh they are so far from reality its unreal, who except those born with a silver spoon in there mouth have never had money worries sometime in there lives, lucky you if you havent I have 3 children and a wife that I support with no help I slipped into the red for the 1st time in 25 years and was charged £214 for the slip that is a discusting charge for a 2 £10 pound direct debits and a bounced cheque profit off the back of the less fortunate. This type of behavoir from banks pushes people further in the red and the banks love it rubbing there hands in glee!!!!!

Gary, Cardiff , Wales

Overhead costs of send a charge for being overdrawn, are 1 sheet of a4 paper, and pressing return on the computer that combines the amount, name and address and bill.
Then the contract is under question, it is the manner as well as the fine print that has to be examined, the world is not simply black and white, it has colours also.
So integrity, sincerity, bullying, and gross overcharging with intimidation were not written into the contract. That's what is egregiously invidious about the whole thing about abuse of power against the weak. SO the next time, you sue the argument “If I don't pay my electricity bill I get cut off; “ try adding, a £40 bill, lack of integrity, insulting your intelligence and see how you feel about the simple print in a contract.

Tony, London, UK

The Co-Op Bank are one of the worst they would regularly get people overdrawn and then add charges but this does not go back just 6 years ago. It dates back over 15 years ago. Will people ever get such money refunded with interest?

Paul Mason, Mansfield, UK

The Financial Services Consumer Panel is appointed by the FSA. It is in no way representative of consumers, and it's tagline is therefore wholly dishonest.
The FSA is a private limited company managed and financed by members of the industry it's supposed to regulate. This article is interesting as it seems to criticise their paymasters. The reality is that it's mere smoke and mirrors. The action they've taken is to delay refunds to consumers for as long as possible.

James Dey, London, UK

The title of this article justifiably and correctly defines the behaviour of the banking institution in UK - Lies, scams and threats and fat profit is the name of the game for this industry.

The FSA is ability to tame the exploitative nature and the sharp prctices of the UK banking industry towards the customer is questionable. The bank's own us all!

jan drena, London, UK

I received a bank credit card, and was asked to call a specific number to activate it. I called this number yesterday, and gave my card number electronically, using the telephone keypad. However, I was then switched through to a woman who tried very hard to sell me payment protection and identity theft insurance, and was none too friendly when I made it clear that I was not interested. The whole process seems to have been a marketing strategy. This constant selling of products and loans is what most banks are really about, not basic current accounts.

Cathy, Bristol, UK

I am a director of a retail company. I have seen high banking fees for years. The issue of egregious and inflated fees extends far beyond just overdraft fees. Merchants will know Barclaycard fees and other fees are very high. The banks use near monoplies to force huge payments from merchants which are often thousands of pounds. When I complained about protx services (a payment service provider), I was just threatend immediately with account closure. The managers at protx knew that my business had already invested in systems to interface to protx. The article from the Times is aggressive but long overdue. I think we will see massive fines imposed on the banks when the cases are concluded. Someone talked about bankers working hard. Well, I hear a lot of bankers earning six figures.

Trevor, Westcliff,

Banking remains "legalized crime"...

D.Davies, London.,

You're told about fees for unauthorised overdraft when you sign up for the account. You sign to say you have understood them. You go over the authorised overdraft and you're charged the fees. What part of that is so difficult to understand?

Laura, Birmingham, UK

Have these people never heard of the law of contract?

After working in the business for over 40 years I feel that it is the customers who are usually at fault. They enter into a contract with the bank to (inter alia) conduct their accounts in a proper manner. If they breach that contract by, for example, exceeding a credit limit then a) the bank has the right to cancel the contract (ie close the account) or b) enquire into the circumstances, examine the customer's known financial ability to cover the unauthorised overdraft and to reclaim the costs of such examination (which is manual and expensive) and decide whether to make the requested payment / action.
If customers don't like option b) then they should honour the terms if the contract they have entered into or close their accounts.

If I don't pay my electricity bill I get cut off; if I breach the terms of my bank contract I should expect to be cut off. Simple!

David Brown, Caudeval, France

When I opened a savings account so I could deposit the (paltry sum of) money my ex had given me, my bank opened an account IN MY EX'S NAME. I yelled at them. They apologised. And did nothing. Weeks later, they told me that my decree absolut and my passport were not proof of my divorce or my current name. I yelled at them again and they came 'round. Good grief. Needless to say, I'm looking for another bank, preferably one abroad.

starling, Lancaster,

I find this quite a difficult question to address. Having had a debt problem greatly compounded by vicious bank charges, I have a lot of sympathy for complainants. However, having got through it, paid all outstanding debts and started over, I'm not so sure. These days I have no credit cards, no cheque book and a Visa Electron debit card which can be used only if there are funds in my bank account to meet whatever I want to pay for. I have a Maestro (pre-paid) card to pay bills that can't be paid via internet banking, Visa Electron, or cash, and have only one small direct debit on my account. I have not so far encountered any difficulties. This situation concentrates the mind wonderfully in respect of keeping my bank account in credit. Often I have to do without things to achieve that, but I am a good deal happier than I ever was wrestling with debts and often wonder why I didn't exercise better self-discipline in the first place.

P Dawson, Guildford, UK

Interesting how at the time Banks are in the high court trying to ensure that there is no more claw back of EXCESS Charges the FSA comes in to criticise but not name the banks.

Murdo your comment lacks thought, the issue is not with regards to the rate that banks charge for overdrawn balances, it is simply their heavy handed approach when individuals exceed their limit.
i.e. exceed your limit by £1 and get charged £15+ for unauthorised. This pushes someone further into the red, then the bank charges more for any subsequent debits and it snowballs.

Banks no longer provide a service that was offered back in the 70's and 80's where a Bank Manager was a respected person in society. They ar now spotty youths with a degree in paint balling with no concept of the real world.

If they provided a service then they would be putting something back where society needs it, as opposed to punishing those who can afford it least, profit lead only

Markus, Thorpe Bay Essex, England

The real scandal is how long its taken the FSA to act.

The FSA is not-fit-for-purpose. An effective regulator should have steped in months if not years ago.

This country seams to suffer from a varierty of slow regulators like the Office of Fair Trading - who wont act untill a massive revolt occures in the press and the courts and they cant do anything but act. Meanwhile UK consumers are being ripped off left right and centre

J Rowles, Richmond, England

"Surely going overdrawn is stealing; taking from a bank money which is not one's own."

Or you could say you're taking back the money the bank has pilfered from you.

starling, Lancaster,

Any help to consumers who object to paying supplements because they pay cash to airlines, telephone companies, and the like because they do not have/do not want to have credit cards?

Hosking, London, Geat Britain

I do not condone over bearing bullying companies nor careless, undisciplined spendthrifts. A sensible carefull customer is treated with some respect by the banks and can obtain an overdraft. Why should any business supply credit or agree to handle transactions on behalf of spendthrift individuals. Why should I as a carefull customer pay more to bail out these people who blatently missuse the system. The FSA is no friend of the customer only of the profligate.
Finally, no I have never worked for a bank or been anything other than a bank customer.

mike gilbert, bournemouth, uk

Come down from your moral (and incorrectly constructed) high horse, Murdo. The banks have ruined some customers with their technique of targetting victims to pay for other, more fortunate peoples' 'free banking'.

No sooner than the agreement to go to a test case is announced, the greedy banks are at it again - leaving long recorded messages on their telephone banking services 'warning' customers with outstanding claims that their proceedings 'may now be delayed by over a year'; no doubt in a bid to encourage them to give up. We're not giving up, though.

Philip, London, England

Anybody who feels anger at their bank for over-charging can easily get their own back - always pay off the credit card, never leave savings in old, low interest accounts and generaly make as little money for them as possible. Also switch your accounts as often as you want to (don't feel any emotion towards your bank, it'll NEVER be reciprocated) and check the sunday paper for the best buys.
Easy, and you'll be costing the banks money, not vice versa. Now who'll be smug?

Justin, Alford, UK

Banks give you an overdraft limit. If you go over it without permission, that's your fault. If its unavoidable, then you should call in advance to let them know. Then they adjust your limit and bingo - no fee.

Taking someone else's money without permission is called stealing. Frankly, people incurring the fees should count themselves lucky that it only costs them £30.

And the bleeding hearts out there should be thankful that the stupidity of the few subsidises free banking for the rest of us. I know I am.

Bottom line: everybody knows about the fees, so its hardly a case of the banks being dishonest. And if you don't want to pay for the service, stop taking money that doesn't belong to you.

Ray Allen, St Albans,

Is this the letter on the FSA website that says in its second paragraph: "It is important to recognise that during the course of our thematic work we did see evidence of firms taking steps to improve their approach"? And then: "We also noted positive efforts by some firms to do more to assess who they are charging, why and when, and thus what more they can do to help ..."? Oh, and there's that appendix which lists all the positive efforts banks are making.

A bit of balance in this story would have helped. Half a million people work for banks and a lot of them do a good job. Give them a break.

Hugh Pugh, London, UK

I worked in banking for 32 years and happily took early retirement some while back.I can confirm that the way Banks treat customers is a disgrace.All that concerns them is next years' profits and next months' league tables.I feel sorry for the staff on the front line who are under pressure to achieve targets.If they don't impose charges they could face disciplinary action, and if they do impose them and lose a good account as a result, they may also face disciplinary action ! What a way to run a business organisation.I'm just glad I'm out of it.

Mike, Dunstable, England

I remember 45 years ago as a teenager who had just got a bank account, discussing with my father who was a manager for LLoyds, the purpose of banks. I believe I uttered something about "service to the public" - my father quickly put me right and I have always remembered what he said "banks are there to make money on the money they lend you, and money on the money you lend them" - very succinct!

Peter Myatt, Limassol, Cyprus

Surely going overdrawn is stealing; taking from a bank money which is not one's own. I really don't understand what people are whining about.

Murdo, newcastle, UK

John Howard, chairman of the Financial Services Consumer Panel, said: “The wide range of criticisms in this letter to chief executives, especially in relation to closing the accounts of customers who complain, suggests that some banks are having difficulty making judgments about the fair treatment of customers.”
Sorry John...
The banks know precisely what they are doing.
They hide behind their respectable and caring personnae in order to knowingly punish the people who can least afford to be penalised for exceeding overdraught limits etc.
They make entirely obscene profits at the expense of people who have placed their trust in the banks ability to offer an *honest* service.

jeffers, Maidstone,