Some months its hard to pay the regualr standard household bills, however in the event that there is not enough to cover bills and i go overdrawn the bank are allowed to take their charges out of my account whether there is enough or not and charge me unauthorised fees this then means instead of a bill costing me £21.50 it now costs me £21.50 plus £30.00 plus £28.00 when will this stop making life hell for us already hard up families as its hard enough already. and finding the extra money to cover these bills is almost impossible, hense further charges being incurred, someone has to stop these THIEVES taking our hard earned cash.. the cash in my account is earned through my husband working away from his family do the banks have no concious i think not.

lisa, port talbot, south wales

I can't help but agree with the view that the waiver given to the the banks by the FSA is so one-sided it only worsens the situation and seems to corroborate the claims that these charges are unlawful.

Remember how the FSA is financed. By the financial sector. Seems like the banks have said "we pay you so give us a way out of this mess, at least for a year".

If the courts find the charges are found to be lawful, what alternative do people have as far as getting salaries paid in and bills paid?

What about the poor people on the breadline that are the typical recipients of the hardships caused by the penalty charges? Charges that all banks now seem to emphasise are service charges. If they're for a service, give us a breakdown of the costs. Think not.

If the banks are found to have been unlawfully charging people money, will their directors be punished through the courts like a citizen would. Think not.

David Mannion, Paisley, Scotland

The OFT and the other organisations are totally spineless and useless to us consumers. The banks have been allowed to carry on as before, but the consumers have been stopped from claiming. The banks couldn't have wished for a better result

George Handley, Lancaster,

The answer to future banking costs is for us all to agree to 'no interest' current accounts - on both credit and authorised debit balances.
As banks also refuse to protect us in security issues these days, like identity theft, chip 'n' pin problems, etc - draw all your money out on pay day and pay in cash wherever you can. Then the banks can't 'borrow' your money, making even more profit by lending it out to other people.

Interest should only be paid on savings.

Sarah, Midlands,

Come on FSA, play the game and be even-handed. If customers have had their proceedings stayed until the High Court's decision is made, surely it is only right that banks should be instructed to stop charging those fees which are clearly unreasonable or will they simply be allowed to do as they like and ignore customers as they invariably do.

So far as the court's decision not to deal with claims until next year is both unfair an unreasonble and should be opposed.

Additionally, whilst the courts deal with he question of bank charges could they also look into the enormous profits made by the banks whn clearing cheques - something else the FSA has conveniently forgotten.

Rodney Barker, Gainsborough, England U.K

Today 06/08/2007, I have just received a letter from my bank telling me that my claim cannot be honoured until the courts have passed judgement on the whole issue. How on earthy can the banks be given permission to suspend payments, and yet still continue to charge the same exorbitant fees on overdrawn accounts. This is not a challenge to the Judges, but I cannot see any one of them allowing the banks to continue charging huge fees of this nature. Fellow customers, it seems like there is no organisation that fully represents us customers. We as customers need stronger representation and not just small organisations whose arms can be twisted and they simply turn away from what they started leaving the
customer in the cold or totally unprotected. This is our money.
we deserve it and it should be given back. FSA, OFT AND FSO
You have not handled this affair well. You are one sided. You started it all, and have failed to finish it. Anyway we will wait.

Dave Mwila, Eastham, London

In reply to Don Meadow ....quote "If the case is lost by the banks then it will mean that the vast majority of customers will end up paying for the actions of the financially incontinent."

So you don't see it from a position that those who struggle financially are being unfairly charged so that you can continue to rape the services of the bank "free of charge". You don't share the opinion that everyone who uses the services of a bank should have to pay their fair share of banking costs?

Tell that to the people, many single parents, who are having these ludicrous charges ravaged from social security benefits like income support and child benefit - by the banks totally disregarding another law in place to protect these benefits.

The goverment under statute, class this money as the minimum amount required to live on for basic living, but you want the banks to continue to profit from people like that so that it costs you nothing to write a cheque or use a cash machine! You make me sick!

Alan, Carrickfergus,

Most Banks levy £35.00 for refusing to pay a Direct Debit or
Standing Order, in these circumstances none of the bank's money has been placed at risk so exactly what 'service' has the bank provided to warrant such a charge?
(oh I forgot a computer generated letter sent 2nd class - cost 30p max).
The charge is debited immediately so you could end up
'overdrawn' and be charged again for an 'unauthorised overdraft ' (funny enough they don't bounce their charges).

Tell me ' TIM of Manchester'
who exactly is 'taking' money from whom???
As for your rhetorical question.
You already know the answer.
Your Interest bearing 'free' bank account is being paid for by those in financial difficulties.
High time you paid your own way.

Vince, Sheffield, England

So, no decision will be reached on bank charges for upwards of one year by the High Court and the FSA has instructed the banks to suspend any action concerning any claims by customers. Similarly the Courts are suspending cases already brought by customers. I trust the FSA and the OFT have instructed the banks to suspend any prospective charges no matter under what guise they are brought?

Rodney Barker, Gainsborough, England U.K

Just got to 'poke my nose in' again! It is legally incorrect for the banks to ask for a stay on the basis they have been given a waiver by the OFT.
The OFT are not a party to the proceedings involved in reclaiming charges, and therefore are not at liberty to issue 'directions', only the Judge can do so. It could be argued that the OFT are the 'advisors', but again this is not the case, as the banks use solicitors [in-house usually] to defend claims.
Finally (thanks goodness for that I hear you cry! )the European Court has already ruled on Human Rights and this legislation appears to offer some hope for those currently engaged in court cases - they have the right to a fair hearing and more importantly EQUAL TREATMENT.
My own case is due to be heard on 20/8/2007, and a time estimate has been given by the Judge of 5 minutes! Watch this space, and in the meantime - remember 'IT'S YOUR MONEY YOU ARE CLAIMING' - Best wishes to everyone.

Howard Rutherford, Eastbourne, Sussex

I hope to see banks reducing the charges to nothing or even a monthly charge, its ridiculous to think we have money going into a bank to which they charge what they say is fair £38 for being overdrawn by 2p. They decide when transactions go out aswell as a recent one for me went out and a supposed charge with it and they took the charge not the Direct Debit. Natwest are as bad as the rest.

Mark, Ormskirk,

Can anyone explain to me, as a person who has paid his debts, never had an unauthorised overdraft, and gets interest on his free current account why I should care about this issue, beyond the excuse it will give the banks to finally start charging me?

People took money without asking - where's the sense of personal responsibility?

Tim, Manchester,

i think i is discusting how these banks charges people, 1 letter of admin work which cost them 2 min to prepare and print dont cost them 30.00 pounds...it make me ill, i have been charges almost over 3000.00 pounds over the last 6 years, and this is only because i work on a very stricket budget, and if one thing goes wrong, by mistake, they can charge you ap to 3 times after it has a chain reaction, i hope they loose big time,!!!

tiaan, london, uk

I hope that should the banks win the case they wiill pursue those who have received a refund of charges for a return of the money + interest.

If the case is lost by the banks then it will mean that the vast majority of customers will end up paying for the actions of the financially incontinent.

Yes, people who p**s their money up the wall without regard to the consequences.

Don Meadow, Coventry,

People should still be allowed to continue their claims while the OFT do what they need to do and the FSA should not have grented permission for the banks to stop handling claims yet continue to apply charges.
Millions has already been paid out so the banks know they will need to pay all charges back. Are they going to prove the Judges wrong?
They only refund if they have to.

Stephen, Cardiff,

How glad am I that I started this process in February 2007 & hance since recieved an out of court settlement with Natwest, receiving an offer equal to the amount taken originally??!! I can see this whole process continuing to lumber on way into the future, with the ultimate outcome not in favour of the consumer.
It did, however, strike me as unusual for the bank to be so generous in it's gesture of goodwill, considering they are in the right?!

S Morgan, Pembrokeshire,

It's called the Office of Fair Trading, yet the banks have the right to suspend repayment of charges, but are not ordered to suspend applying charges. What a farce!

kim gonsalves, Laindon, Essex

I am in the middle of a claim and have been told today that all the cases on the same day as mine have been stayed.

This is a disgusting situation in which the consumer has again been trampled by the establishment.

We can't continue our claims, in the meantime the banks can continue to levy what we all consider to be punitive charges with immunity.

Also, the banks appear to have known about this before it was made public.

None of the consumer groups who have sparked the revolution have been consulted either.

Thanks for nothing FSA, OFT and FSO

Bernard, South Wales, UK

This can't be happening! Again the consumer is held in contempt by the Banks and now the FSA is effectively removing any re-course action we, the consumer, had. Already the banks are refuting claims of over-charging by the OFT, now they will simply ignore any requests for refunds. Will the 6 year rule still apply in 2008 or will the FSA simply slap wrists and walk away. This doesn't bode well for us. This action by the FSA just shows how they favour the Banks. It doesn't matter how long they delay, the decision was made today. Look out consumer if you thought you'd been conned wait for 2008.

Jeremy Cox, Bath,

This is a David and Goliath fight and basically this "waiver" smacks David in the mouth and takes his slingshot away and bascially hands it to Goliath (banks) and tells him to relax and do whatever he wants for a while...

The fact it was announced on the same day parliament broke up for its 13 weeks smacks of cowardess and collusion also...

Get claiming for Credit Cards charges and PPI Claims also...

Matthew , Altrincham, UK

If someone with a credit risk overdraws, it is only fair the bank covers the risk factor. Maybe we should be like France and not permit cheque accounts to be overdrawn: make a proper borrowing.

James, Sevenoaks, England

What can we do to complain about the FSA's decision to stop refunds of bank charges until the court case is settled? We are a family on a low income struggling to pay monthly bills and our mortgage, the money we could claim back from the previous 6 years would make a significant differance to us as it would help us clear away some debt.Instead of simpathising with the money hungry greedy high street banks who seem to have mislaid any level of customer service and understanding of their customers needs they should be thinking about helping out the consumers who again seem to get the bad end of the deal. But hey whats new? Everyone seems to kick you when your down.

mrs fiona walker, Scunthorpe, England