Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

Right, I can hold my hands up, and say that if I go over my overdraft limit, then they can charge me (even though I think it's balls). However, I have just opened a letter (I got one last year, and probably ranted then too) saying that they have reviewed my overdraft, and are pleased to offer me exactly the same thing for another year, and will be charging me ?25 for the service!


WTF!?!?!?!?!?


I never asked them to review it, they haven't changed it, and I am being charged for it. They are fecking thieves, plain and simple!

Keef's house.


Mrs Keef: "Hi love, we're back. Did you get the washing in?"


Keef: "No I haven't, I've just been on the phone to the bank asking them why they've renewed my bloody overdraft that I didn't want in the first place!!"


Mrs Keef: "Yeah, I was meaning to talk to you about that..."

Keef Wrote:

WTF!?!?!?!?!? I never asked them to review it, they haven't changed it, and I am being charged for it. They are fecking thieves, plain and simple!


Keef, it is obvious. The much much more important thing to be asking here, is why do The Banks do it?


::o

Because they want to bleed every dishonest penny they can out of people whilst the law still allows it. Yes red_devil, I think the cases are still going on. I actually got about ?2k back a couple of years ago, before they froze it, but if the banks lose, I'll be on to them again, as it just makes me so angry. I wouldn't mind so much if they charged you a fiver, or even a tenner, it's just the amoun ts they charge you that get me.


Tony, not quite sure why you've basically quoted my question from the drawing room, as this is a very different scenario, and nothing to do with that.

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Tony, not quite sure why you've basically quoted

> my question from the drawing room, as this is a

> very different scenario, and nothing to do with

> that.


Don't worry Keef, it's this new bag of seeds he's trying out.

Keef Wrote:Because they want to bleed every dishonest penny they can out of people whilst the law still allows

it.




Tony, not quite sure why you've basically quoted my question from the drawing room, as this is a very different scenario, and nothing to do with that.


Same principle though Keef.


Certain parties ( in this case Banks) screwing the system for whatever they can get away with M8...:)

Well isn't the world getting smaller every day PGC. I grew up in Leeds and my parents still live there, hence the article being scanned from the parish magazine. My drinking career started in The George in the mid-late 80's when Fabio was still very much in charge. It's still busy but nowhere near as entertaing as in its heyday.

I haven't rang this year, because I did last year, and just came off the phone in a bigger rage. They basically just say "we write to you informing you, so tough".


Funnily enough, after writing this yesterday, Mrs Keef said she'd just seen a survay / report in "Which", suggesting the worse and best banks for charges. Think I'll be having a look at that and swapping.


The above story wasn't about A&L, although I wasn't surprised to hear they'd come out as one of the worst for charges. I have an account with them, which is kept well in order, but a couple of months back, I slipped in to an overdraft by about ?2, because a payment went out that I hadn't noticed. Anyway, it was about 13 days before I did realise (I don't use the account that much), and they slapped me with a ?65 charge, ?5 a day, even though the amount we were talking about was less than that!!!!


C**ts, the lot of them!

Keef: "Yes hello, I've recieved a letter from your bank telling me the overdraft that I quite clearly stated I didn't want has been reviewed and renewed at the cost of ?25. Could you explain why this is."


Bank: "Stand and deliver!"


Keef: "Excuse me."


Bank: "Stand and deliver. Your money or your patience!"


Keef: "I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand."


Bank: "You have a choice. Either you hand over your cash or I'll put you on hold!"


Keef: "Is this some sort of joke?"


Bank: "At the moment squire, the jokes on you!"


Keef: "Look here, I've been awfully patient with you people, now give me back my money!"


Bank: "Sorry, can't do that."


Keef: "Why on earth not!!"


Bank: "It's ours."


Keef: "No it bloody well isn't. You've stole it from me!!"


Bank: "No, the government allows us to fleece those that deposit their savings with us. It's all above board. You've also incurred a ?100 bill for this phone call. You'll see it on your next statement. Goodbye."


Keef "Fu......!!!"

Mobile phone companies that won't put you through to tech support when their f**kwit systems/software prove lacking.


Endlessly explaining to call centre operatives the problem, who relay it to tech dept, who tell the operative something to tell me, which gets inevitably into Chinese whispers territory because call centre operatives frankly have no understanding at all of the words they are uttering. So you go back to them, they go back to the tech person etc. etc. Ad infinitum.


How can it more efficient to constantly use the time of *two* people at the operator, rather than one of them? (And I'm not even counting my own wasted time.)


Same true of broadband companies, largely.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Trees are great - I plant and raise my own and petition the council to look at damaged specimens and plant more - but they need to be tended to when they’re in non-woodland spaces. I encourage all those who have a strong liking for trees to plant them, grow from seed etc. - much better for all than tapping on keypads. 
    • Would they keep until Christmas?
    • As a customer of DKH I have sympathy with the staff but this a matter for their trade union to address. The law states that temperatures in the workplace must be “reasonable”, and adds guidance that a reasonable minimum temperature is 16C for sitting down jobs like checkouts or 13C for physical work like packing and stacking.  The law also states that there must be easily readable thermometers installed in the workplace so that staff can check the temperature. When I still worked, these would be mercury thermometers red-lined at 16C, so staff knew when it was permissible to stop work if they were uncomfortable. However, I always worked in trade union represented jobs. I suspect (but certainly don’t know) that a lot of Sainsbury’s staff these days don’t bother to join the union, so are not protected (please put me right if you know otherwise).  In any workplace, you either take collective action to improve things or just accept the conditions imposed on you. If staff are in a union, they need to take a hand in making sure the union and its reps do their job in representing them.
    • £1,155 now raised. Would be great to get to £1,500 by 17th January when the Crowdfunder will close. His family and friends are hoping to do something for charity in his name... 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...