We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
|
By:
why irrelevant?
my answer was you haven't paid for other people's inability to live within their means? |
|
By:
If the ruling went the other way then I would have to pay to subsidise these people.
|
|
By:
Thatchers legacy lives on
|
|
By:
too late to worry about that, you're already paying the banks because they failed to run their business in a fit and proper manner and ran up massive multi billion pound losses! Why oh why do people defend the banks to the hilt, the vast majority have been conditioned by the powers that be and bow down to these massive organisations. The banks attempted to screw customers, usually the poorer ones, failed totally at running a sustainable profitable business then had to run to the tax payer, on more than one occassion, yet still people blame the customer for going £3 overdrawn for a day or so! Unbelievable stuff gets posted on here.
|
|
By:
Everything's Gone Green 25 Nov 19:00
If the ruling went the other way then I would have to pay to subsidise these people. Please explain how? |
|
By:
Have you read the thread?
What about the news? |
|
By:
completely agree buzzer
if someone goes overdrawn, they get hit with a £35 fine, when it really cost the bank only £1 or so one bank made a 6 bil profit last year and 2 bil came from fines? so if they didn't charge £35 for each "crime" they'd still have 4 billion profit? I really don't get it?? |
|
By:
So who's the mug then?
Don't abuse your banking facilities and you won't pay charges. Live within your means. |
|
By:
EGG - Its the amount they charge thats the issue, dont you see
|
|
By:
And if the charges were much less then people wouldn't care about going overdrawn without authorisation and staying overdrawn.
|
|
By:
I don't get banks charges, nor do I have an overdraft and nor do I have a credit card
but banks are extremely greedy, and I don't like the fact they won this case |
|
By:
EGG, You're talking shoite mate.
If the banks don't charge ridiculous fines, YOU don't have to pay anything. It is not about living within means. YOU are not subsidising poor people in any way. YOU Do not have to pay anything for people who borrow from banks. |
|
By:
obviously being overdrawn long enough is gonna get back at the customers in the end
you can only have so much a big overdraft banks would be making the money in interest anyway |
|
By:
the mugs are the tax payers who've bailed out these failed businesses for billions of pounds, the mugs are the small businesses who are suffering because the banks couldn't see the woods for the trees whilst this bubble was growing and growing only to pop in their greedy fat faces but luckily for them Mister £8 an hour, who they've been robbing blind for years, rode to their rescue.And the propoganda machine makes sure the majority sit happy with these decisions because the poor little banks would have to charge all the nice people to withdraw their money if they lost this case and it would have all been the fault of these nasty, nasty people who've hit a rough patch and exceeded their limit by 50p.
|
|
By:
Oh, and as I said.....
What about when banks charge for NOT giving an overdraft, or for bouncing a £3 cheque (for example)? No-one has borrowed anything then, and the banks make money for absolutely nothing. |
|
By:
which makes EGG a mug
|
|
By:
Buzzer.
Excellent post. |
|
By:
dirty rotten thieving b@stards... all banks.
|
|
By:
They are a cartel. If this charging business wasn't an agreement between ALL the banks, one of them could break ranks tomorrow, and get the business of 30million people instantly.
|
|
By:
SF
The banks have stated that if the courts / OFT ruled that they could not charge at these levels then they would have to start charging customers who run their accounts within authorised limits for cash withdrawals etc. That's my point about me subsidising other people. |
|
By:
Everything's Gone Green 25 Nov 19:17
SF The banks have stated that if the courts / OFT ruled that they could not charge at these levels then they would have to start charging customers who run their accounts within authorised limits for cash withdrawals etc. THEY subsidise your free banking account!.........numpty |
|
By:
Well said Buzz
|
|
By:
Well done to the Supreme Court.
Why should I have to start paying for banking when the numptys who dont keep in their limits subsidise me today. Keep on overdrawing and saving me money please! |
|
By:
Congratulations punterfleece you have resorted to personal abuse within a few posts of joining a discussion which has been going for 9 hours.
I've made my points many times over without resorting to petty name calling. I'll make an exception now though, just for you. Twát. |
|
By:
Banks shouldnt charge you for your accounts, they have your money and give you x interest whilst lending it to others at x +1.
Thats the core of banking, and the greed of these ba$tards to charge what they do for sweet FA is scandalous |
|
By:
These are charges for unauthorised activity NOT standard charges.
|
|
By:
EGG
you keep saying you subsidise other people but you don't and never will it's those people who go overdrawn and get fined are the ones that subsidise you what part don't you get? but obviously nothing is gonna change your mind, and I realise am sat on here typing, when I should be eating my tea so back later, probably not for this thread though but I don't think this argument will get anywhere so you called me a tw@t, you got your own back |
|
By:
The courts can say what they like, they're only repeating what the barristers tell them.
Do they mean, in order for banks to contine to rob people blind, without the windfall of extortion they use at the moment, they'll need to extort it elsewhere? I think they do. They make billions of £ by 'fining' people. You open a business, and try telling customers if they're late paying their account you will charge them for it. You'd last 5 minutes. |
|
By:
You open a business, and try telling customers if they're late paying their account you will charge them for it.
like a mobile telco? or hmrc? |
|
By:
You open a business and people abuse it.
You charge them for this abuse so that your customers who do operate within the rules don't have to subsidise them. Seems fair. |
|
By:
I just cant believe that ppl are trying to justify what the banks charge...its just mindboggling
|
|
By:
It is mindboggling but they know it would be impossible to spout this kind of sh1t in a pub
without ending up on the floor with a bunch of boots landing on your face. Forums are an outlet for confrontational mindboggling bollx and tbf that's what makes them so entertaining. |
|
By:
from now on
when i get a letter saying my interest rate has automatically gone down without my approval i am going to write my bank a letter and charge them £38 for the inconvenience i love the morons that actually believe that we have free banking now. Anyone understand what the banks do with your money? its not sat in fort knox. its probably invested in a few bricks in detroit. Never had a legitimate charge in my life and im angry at this decision. They really are robbing bstards at every turn the day that the supermarkets come to the market is a great day imo |
|
By:
STUDYFORM 25 Nov 19:27
The courts can say what they like, they're only repeating what the barristers tell them Goodness! I wish the court had made that clear to me all those years ago :) |