if banks have already made repayments for chrges already made surely this is an admittance to the chrges being unlawful???

bm, london, london

"Not one of you could ever say you're brilliant with money - if you're that good then why aren't you all financial advisors telling us all how the hell you do it?????"

I'm not a financial advisor, because it would not be a profitable use of my time :o)

It's a bit like being a teacher - if you were really good at something, you would be doing it rather than teaching others how to do it!

Andrew, Croydon, UK

I object to being charged £30.00 for going 50p overdrawn.

I come from a country where we have a minimal monthly account maintenance fee (NZD$1.50) and if we do not have the funds, the transaction is declined.
The banks in this country openly allow customers to go into overdraft by not processing electronic transactions instantly - especially deposits and then profiteer from it by charging disproportionate fees.
At one point, I had deposited cash into my account to cover a direct debit, it wasn't cleared in time, the bank (Lloyds TSB) charged me £35 pounds on this occasion for going overdrawn and then reversed the DD and charged me another £40.00! £75.00 penalties for one transaction when the funds had been transferred 3 days earlier - Hardly a fair system on the consumer.

Alex , London,

To all you people who "look after your money"...
You can't tell me or anyone else that there's never been a moment where you've struggled with money unless you're rich. Those who struggle and may go over their limit at times or have the occassional bounced cheque don't exactly want to be punished for not earning enough to pay the banks to have billions of pounds in profit.
Show me where else our charges go to other than keeping our current accounts free and then maybe i'll agree to pay the charges i've had whilst being a student. I'm good with my money now, I even have a mortgage but that doesn't stop me getting the odd charge because my mortgage company have set payment dates where they take payment before my monthly wage goes into my account.
Not one of you could ever say you're brilliant with money - if you're that good then why aren't you all financial advisors telling us all how the hell you do it?????

Sarah, Newcastle,

Everybody knows the charges and fees going into this - so why do we moan when we get charged?

Also - the argument that it only costs the banks £2 to process a bounced cheque is mute.

We know it costs less than we pay for every item - where will this end - claims against Dentists and Vets for exorbitant fees, the price of estate agents fees etc - all provided at prices much higher thanit costs to provide them.

Gary, Milton Keynes, UK

I think this is unfair that people like myself who make sure they have the funds needed in their account to pay bills at the right time could be the ones who loose out again as this may lead to the end of “free” current accounts as banks try to recover costs. And the offenders collect their cheques laughing all the way to the bank .does it pay to be honest ?

mr sneddon, fife, scotland

That should upset a few 'consumers' who need the money for another holiday or new car.

What happened to caveat emptor? Surely they knew the account had penalties if they went overdrawn?

This country has gone compensation crazy!

Evan Owen, Harlech, Gwynedd

I totally agree if the FSA can say to the Banks suspend refunds then it follows what is good for the Goose is good for the Gander,
suspend charges until the court rules that Bank Penalty charges are legal and fair. So many country court Judges say they are not, can they all be wrong ? If so why are they Judges?

The case of Lloyds Tsb was not heard due to a lack of evidence therefore Lloyds did not win anything as the case was not heard.

Most Banks and building societies have caved in before going into court Why if their case is so good?

Liam J. Duncan, Bicester, United Kingdom

You can only claim back up to 6 years worth of charges due to the Limitation Act 1980.

The Financial Services industry is extremely powerful in this country. The OFT have launched a court case which will drag on for years, whilst bank customers will continue to be charged overdraft penalites, it seems from the media articles that they will not be able to claim the charges back. The media reporting doesn't clarify as to whether the FSA ruling prevents small claims cases from going ahead or whether it only affects rulings made by the Financial Ombudsman Service.

James Dey, London, UK

Lisette, what is the 'average' minimum wage? There's no average about it. The minimum wage for over 18s is a fixed amount of 5.35 per hour.

The banks do not place hardship on vulnerable customers. The charges for breaching an overdraft limit are widely publicised, and knowing how expensive this would be, I choose not to exceed my overdraft and waste money on charges. If the charges were equivalent to a day's wages, I would redouble my efforts not to exceed the agreed limit.

Andrew, Croydon, UK

Then surely the banks should suspend these charges until there is a high court ruling.

Chris, Bournemouth, England

I think it should go back further than 6 years. When I got divorced way back in '92 there was a point where I was levelling off paying my bills while only having 1 income and due to bank charges taking me into overdraft AND getting charged for being overdrawn I really struggled. I think there must have been 2 months of being charged £500.
I would love the opportunity of getting all those charges back. I still have the statements and it would be nice.

Gary Knowlson, Ripley, Derbyshire, UK

I think the banks chargings are disgusting! In a society were the average minimum wage is £5.35, the banks have no idea on the hardship they place on vulnerable customers.

You could go to work all day to pay a £38.00 bank charge.

They should be able to recoup their costs, but im pretty certain this has no reflection in the fees they charge.

They're ripping us off and its about time it is put to a stop!

lisette mcmahon, liverpool,

Whilst I think everyone is glad that the banks now want to reach some clarity, albeit in the High Court, I think it is wrong for the FSA to have allowed a reprieve for the banks whilst that clarity is being sought. There are three points that need to be made:

a) a ruling by the High Court could take an inordinated amount of time, people should be left hanging by the banks in the meantime;

b) the banks are big and profitable enought to carry on doing what they've been doing since the consumer revolt. The onus on the banks should be that untill the rules have changed they should continue to deal with applications brought against them;

c) irrespective of the outcome of the High Court action, the FSA should seek to put in place guidelines that ensure that consumer financial safety is maintained.

Vincenzo Rampulla, London,

So the rest of us, who can actually count and manage our money, are likely to suffer because of those who can't. or won't.
Typical of modern Britain, punish the responsible and reward the irresponsible.

eddie reader, birmingham, uk

Does this also apply to banks APPLYING the charges?
Afterall, until there is a ruling to say they are fair,
they should not be applied to customers accounts.

Dar£n (CAG), Worcester, England