Tripps wrote:Perhaps you're thinking of a "Continuous Payment Authority" rather than a Direct Debit. It used to be that only the beneficiary could cancel a CPA, but I think it has changed fairly recently. Seem to remember Paul Lewis mentioned it?
Spot on Tripps. Paul Lewis: "You have always been able to stop a direct debit or standing order just by telling your bank."
As you also note, it is CPA that has caused more problems: http://paullewismoney.blogspot.co.uk/20 ... chive.html
Stanley, if they say you can't, tell them they are wrong and demand to speak to their supervisor.
Nullius in verba: On the word of no one (Motto of the Royal Society)
Wow - it's worse than I thought. Thanks for the research Tizer. I think Paul Lewis should have been in the Honours list
I've beeen wary of Banks for years. I closed an account with Natwest over a £5 bank charge, and once banged the counter at Lloyds for a 50p cash machine charge! The problem is - you can only go so far until they throw you out; as my son found out when he got his charges back, but was told never to darken the door of Natwest ever again. A proud moment -
Born to be mild Sapere Aude Ego Lego Preferred pronouns - Thou, Thee, Thy, Thine My non-working days are Monday - Sunday
Yes, I knew there was a difference between the different types of regular payments and don't worry, I shall be writing hard copy letters asking for confirmation that payments will be stopped. Will be watching my accounts like a hawk. The basic principle the banks run on is to give the customer as little control over their money as possible.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net
"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
Old age isn't for cissies!
The Times newspaper has done its annual contest for the company with the worst treatment of customers and Barclays came out top. The bank responded with a statement about how they've changed and are squeaky clean. No surprise then that Barclays have just sent my 94-year-old dad a letter trying to get him to take out a Barclaycard credit card. They never learn and they never change. He has his account with Lloyds TSB and it's not long ago that they tried to get him to open one of those accounts where you have to deposit a minimum amount every month - the min amount was way above the sum of his pension and we had to tell the bank to leave him alone!
Nullius in verba: On the word of no one (Motto of the Royal Society)
Yet more evidence out today that business has little confidence in the banking sector
This might now actually be stifling any potential growth within the economy and make it more likely that companies will offshore to take advantage of other countries attractive rates of return
I can remember when certain members were saying that the LIBOR scandal was of no great importance. RBS liability is being estimated at the thick end of £1billion, add the legal costs and the taxpayer will have to fork out. Now who was in charge when it was happening?
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net
"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
Old age isn't for cissies!
Is that how regulatory oversight works in this country? I thought most, if not all, regulatory regimes were self-regulatory in that the duty holder complies with statutory duties as they, obviously, are best placed to do so, and do so in the absence of close and stringent oversight by the regulator. Thus, the local kebab shop complies with hygiene duties without being bothered day-in, day-out by the local Environmental Health Officer but if they poison half their Friday night clients they are hauled through the courts and not the Minister with Responsibility for Food Safety, or indeed the PM. The same with the factory that blows up half the street under health and safety law; the farmer that poisons the river under environmental law and the hospital where care standards drop below expected, statutory standards.
There might be in extremis a case for legislators and regulators to answer over deep-seated and systemic failings, but at the end of the day the 'little people' who hold the duty do and properly should, face the music as they are 'in charge'.
There are no UK laws around LIBOR regulation in the UK. Brown, when he was at the Treasury said that there was no reason to regulate it.. All these banks are not being prosecuted in UK courts.
It wasn't a matter of 'laws'. It is a basic principle of any accounting that you never manipulate the base figures on which calculations are based. The thing about LIBOR is that emails and documentation prove that the rates were being manipulated by giving false information to the BBA who consolidated the reports and produced the rate. A simple matter of dishonesty and as Richard says, this has to be self-regulated until culpability is proved. Only then do the regulators have responsibility to act.
What puzzles me is that we are told 'there are no laws/regulations' and therefore no basis for a criminal charge. I would have thought that proof that false information had been given to the BBA would have constituted a basis for sanctions. Richard is right, it was the 'little people' who were dishonest and they should be punished. Large though the fines are, they are regarded as an operating expense and will eventually be reclaimed from the customers.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net
"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
Old age isn't for cissies!
Massive row now started about the amount 'we' paid for our stakes in the banks
'we was robbed' seems to be the consensus and it is likely to get much worse
All this fall out on the high street is being blamed on landlords and rental agreements, but when you have huge property prices then the companies need to leverage as much as possible to maintain their borrowings. Plus the government stuck 5% on business rates.
It could be very messy, and the banks are in full hock to that huge bubble. It needs to burst so that the economy can regenerate faster
Cheaper rents will facilitate entrepreneurial activity, but someone has to take the loss
More evidence that bank executives are incompetent and incapable of running financial businesses - Allied Irish Bank and Bank of Scotland both criticised for being easily taken in by a couple of fraudsters who screwed millions out of the two banks. The banks were warned by their own lawyers and they took no notice. How stupid can you get? Why do we continue to let these people run banks?
Many of our companies and other institutions are well and truly up the spout (or down the drain, take your pick). Look at Rio Tinto Zinc, the boss has fallen on his sword after the company made daft mistakes and lost lots of money.
It struck me when thinking about the state of these businesses that our company bosses no longer value a good reputation - in fact they don't care about the reputation. At first that might sound odd considering all the money they spend on promotion. But that's different, they spend a fortune on promotion and publicity but all with the short-term aim of making a quick buck (often by cynical exploitation of previously loyal customers) which is quite different from the long-term slog to build and maintain a good reputation. Think about the past when ICI, Shell, BP, Unilever, M&S and the like were in the long haul to make a good reputation and to cultivate loyal customers, employees, suppliers and shareholders. All gone now. The bosses want their massive salaries, fat bonuses and enormous pensions and b*gger the rest of us.
Nullius in verba: On the word of no one (Motto of the Royal Society)
I would presume that the peeps who did all the loans quickly left with their performance pay in tact before the balloon went up.
Unfortunately the scandal is repeated across the property sector because all the prices have been chased up on the back of freely available credit and peeps who wanted to borrow money.
The bubble still has to burst, but with the market declining at about 2% per yer and inflation running at 3% it will take almost 15 years to halve the price
See this LINK for the poem Carol Ann Duffy wrote for the Daily Mirror. I like the quote about the 'soft white hands of the bankers picking our pockets. We want it back''
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net
"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
Old age isn't for cissies!
In general, women are more incensed about the bankers than are men - Duffy, Joanna Lumley, PD James, Ros Altmann etc. Too many men are too easily seduced by the `making money' syndome and the testosterone fuelled competition. We should let women run the banks.
Nullius in verba: On the word of no one (Motto of the Royal Society)
It may be my ignorance, but to me poetry is no longer poetry, we were tought poetry at school Wordsworth, etc, to day i cannot tell the difference between " modern" poetry or a short anecdote !!
I agree with Tiz, we could do worse than impose an obligatory quota of women in the senior banking posts. Too much of the 'lads' syndrome. Think Bulingdon Club.... As for modern poetry, I tend to agree but if the poets see it that way we should either accept it or write our own!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net
"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
Old age isn't for cissies!
