This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (April 2009)

The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United Kingdom and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page.

The term bank charge covers all charges made by banks to their customers. In common parlance, the term often relates to charges in respect of personal current accounts. These charges may take many forms, including:

• monthly charges for the provision of an account
• charges for specific transactions (other than overdraft limit excesses)
• interest in respect of overdrafts (whether authorised or unauthorised by the bank)
• charges for exceeding authorised overdraft limits, or making payments (or attempting to make payments) where no authorised overdraft exists

Much of the following discussion relates to the UK personal current account market.

Contents 1 Types of bank charge 1.1 Monthly account charges 1.2 Charges for specific transactions 1.3 Interest in respect of overdrafts 1.4 Charges for exceeding authorised overdraft limits 2 The law 3 See also 4 References 5 External links

[edit] Types of bank charge

[edit] Monthly account charges

Banks may charge their customers a fixed monthly charge for the provision of the account. In the UK, this was not common practice until the 1990s when banks began to introduce this type of bank charges as a means of product differentiation - often offering additional services bundled with the bank account itself (e.g. travel insurance, mobile phone insurance, preferential rates on other products).

[edit] Charges for specific transactions

Until the 1980s, most banks in the UK charged for all transactions. A number of newer entrants to the personal current account market took a "no fees whilst in credit" approach, leading very rapidly to a situation where no bank could compete with others without offering the same deal.

Whilst the loss of income incurred was, to some extent, covered by the interest earned on carrying balances in current accounts, the banks' profitability on personal current accounts was severely impacted by this change in the charging structure. In turn this led to the banks' increased use of charges for exceeding overdraft limits as a means of generating their required level of profitability.

[edit] Interest in respect of overdrafts

Most banks charge interest to their customers in respect of overdrafts. It is common to charge differentially for authorised and unauthorised overdrafts, with unauthorised overdrafts often bearing an interest rate two or three times higher than authorised ones.

In order to gain customers from competitors, banks will sometimes offer introductory 0% or low interest rates on authorised overdrafts, together with generous initial overdraft limits.

As part of the development of the personal current account market in the UK, certain banks have altered their overdraft charging structure to a fixed daily charge, irrespective of the size of the overdrawn balance.

[edit] Charges for exceeding authorised overdraft limits

As banks' income from transaction charges declined, due to the "free banking" which became the de facto standard in the UK personal current account market, and their income from carrying balances fell due to declining interest rates, banks sought to reinstate the profitability of their businesses by significantly increasing the charges levied for exceeding authorised overdraft limits, or when customers make payments (or attempt to make payments), including direct debits, cheque payments or standing orders, where no authorised overdraft limit exists. Typically banks charged in the region of £25 to £39 for transactions in breach of an authorised overdraft limit, irrespective of the size of the transaction or the degree by which the limit was exceeded.

These charges are commonly referred to as penalty charges, although it was held in a test case on the subject (link) that, other than in a few minor cases, most UK banks' charges did not constitute a penalty for breach of contract under common law.

The increase in the size of such charges led to public disquiet ^[1] and to internet-led campaigns against them. Early focus of such campaigns was the argument that they represented penalties for breach of contract, which would then render them limited to the cost to the bank. As noted above, the test case held that they were not penalties for breach of contract, and hence the costs the banks incur are not strictly relevant.

[edit] The law

The key aspects of UK law in question with respect to bank charge disputes are the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI. 1999/2083) which supplemented the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. The test case currently proceeding is Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National and Others (2008)

On 24 April 2008 the High Court handed down its judgement in favour of the OFT ^[2], but the banks appealed this ruling with the appeal case heard in November 2008. ^[3] Pending a final ruling, individual court cases by bank customers were subject to a "stay", meaning that they are unable to be heard other than in cases of personal hardship. The High Court's ruling was upheld at he Court of Appeal on 26 February 2009 and leave to appeal to the House of Lords was refused.^[4]

Despite this, the banks petitioned the House of Lords directed which agreed to hear the case, starting on 18 June 2009. On the 25 November 2009 the House of Lord's successor, the Supreme Court, ruled in favour of the banks in relation to bank charges.^[5]

[edit] See also

• Overdraft
• Overdraft fee
• OFT v Abbey

There is still a route to claim under Regulation 5 of the UTCCR 1999

[edit] References

[edit] External links

• The Guardian, 23 June 2009, Canada: Where bank charges are usual