- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Just In...OFT wins
Collapse
X
-
Just In...OFT wins
McCoy: "Medical men are trained in logic."
Spock: "Trained? Judging from you, I would have guessed it was trial and error." -
No, its a win. The judgement basically says the banks arent above the law and will leave it up to the OFT to determine what is fair and not fair for bank charges.
Common sense wins the day!
Mailman -
Excellent
I wonder how they’ll pass this on to the customer…"Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon MuskComment
-
I already re-claimed charges from my bank.
It was only £30 they stole from me but that is not the point!
I threatened to take them to the small claims court if they didn't pay up! Reluctantly, they coughed up!Comment
-
Originally posted by Jog On View PostExcellent
I wonder how they’ll pass this on to the customer…
Inflated "charges" is not a fair way of making profit, because it is dishonest. Charging all customers to bank with them is a normal and fair way of doing it.
The main beneficiaries of the current dishonest system are customers who avoid "charges". Expect to hear complaints from them if they have to pay for their banking, along the lines of "why should we pay for those who abuse the system?" The fact is that currently those who fall victim to exaggerated charges are paying for those who do not; and there is no just reason why they should. Yes they could avoid the charges; my point is that those who do avoid charges are currently being subsidised by those who suffer them.Comment
-
Lets hope they cave in on this and repay the funds taken and re-adjust their charges.
But: with banks crying about this "credit crunch" will the OFT push it?McCoy: "Medical men are trained in logic."
Spock: "Trained? Judging from you, I would have guessed it was trial and error."Comment
-
Originally posted by expat View PostThe main beneficiaries of the current dishonest system are customers who avoid "charges". Expect to hear complaints from them if they have to pay for their banking, along the lines of "why should we pay for those who abuse the system?" The fact is that currently those who fall victim to exaggerated charges are paying for those who do not; and there is no just reason why they should. Yes they could avoid the charges; my point is that those who do avoid charges are currently being subsidised by those who suffer them.McCoy: "Medical men are trained in logic."
Spock: "Trained? Judging from you, I would have guessed it was trial and error."Comment
-
Originally posted by lilelvis2000 View PostLets hope they cave in on this and repay the funds taken and re-adjust their charges.
But: with banks crying about this "credit crunch" will the OFT push it?
great, they owe me a fortune from the days I was a struggling permie, at least 5-6k by my calculationwhats the lowest you can do this for?Comment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by expat View PostThey will have to: a company is not a tooth fairy, the money has to come from somewhere.
Inflated "charges" is not a fair way of making profit, because it is dishonest. Charging all customers to bank with them is a normal and fair way of doing it.
The main beneficiaries of the current dishonest system are customers who avoid "charges". Expect to hear complaints from them if they have to pay for their banking, along the lines of "why should we pay for those who abuse the system?" The fact is that currently those who fall victim to exaggerated charges are paying for those who do not; and there is no just reason why they should. Yes they could avoid the charges; my point is that those who do avoid charges are currently being subsidised by those who suffer them.
I have charges to claim and I think they are unfair and greedy but I don't think the customers who have managed their finances carefully and sensibly should have to pay.
However the banks will pass this on to the consumers because [indert deity] forbid they pay for it out of their profits and bonuses
Originally posted by lilelvis2000 View PostLets hope they cave in on this and repay the funds taken and re-adjust their charges.
But: with banks crying about this "credit crunch" will the OFT push it?"Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon MuskComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment