Bank loan misselling scam

[leemason]

The funny thing is (and you know what I do Lee) is that you imagine what I say to a bank manager who comes to visit and tries to tell me how I should be running my own business.

I say that to illustrate how correct you are. The money should be dished out by people who know how to operate businesses, not bank workers and black boxes.

You are absolutely correct. Bank business advice is an oxymoron (like Military Intelligence)!

 

[internetspaceships]

The only reason that Barclays didn't need a bailout by the way is that the sold a massive chunk of the bank to various middle eastern funds (mainly owned by the royal families of states like Dubai and Qatar).

Yeah I knew that too mate. I also know that they paid them back in full quite a while ago.

 

[leemason]

Yeah I knew that too mate. I also know that they paid them back in full quite a while ago.

That's how much profit liquid markets makes you! But it was OUR liquidity they made the profits on the back of.

 

[internetspaceships]

Ok so why havent the State owned banks paid their money back if it's that easy?

 

[leemason]

Ok so why havent the State owned banks paid their money back if it's that easy?

A very, very good question! I don't know. All I know is given that amount of free money I'm sure I could make a pretty handsome profit myself.

 

[businessfunding]

Well first of all we should separate the Banks into retail and investment. In this way the excesses of the spivs will have less of an affect on the retail banks.

As most of the big money is in boutique banking, how would the retail banks make their money?

In this way when one of these institutions fails we can let it fail.

We should stop immediately this latest £140bn in cheap loans to the banks it isn't cheap loans to bans it is a subsidy on loans to small businesses and setup an independent investment bank run by people who know businesses and what they need who will these people be an what ubderwriting criteria will they use?. These should be people who know what it's like to start and run their own business. Not people who simply rose up the slippery corporate pole.

We should quickly force the separated investment banks to pay back the loans that we have given to them (with interested) and invest that in our newly created investment bank.

This bank should have a specific remit to invest outside of the south east of England and in "real" industries.Again, what underwriting criteria will they use, and how can you justify geographical bias? Not fictitious financial instruments specifically designed to make huge profits for the few at the expense of the many.

At least that is a start... But come the revolution they'll all be the first against the wall anyway! Is that the Citizen Smith revolution of the '70s?

 

[internetspaceships]

A very, very good question! I don't know. All I know is given that amount of free money I'm sure I could make a pretty handsome profit myself.

Because Barclays is still a business owned by business people. The state owned ones are owned by the politicians who put political gain in front of profit.

So based upon that analogy, which bank would you trust more with your money?

 

[Esk247]

Ok so why havent the State owned banks paid their money back if it's that easy?

Because the government are weak and feeble minded. They don't have a leg to stand on when the big bank operators walk in to the room. Cameron just gulps and shakedly puts a hand out towards his glass of water, he is in the presence of gods.

The whole system is corrupt beyond what we're seeing in the papers. This isn't even the tip of the iceberg, the whole way through from banks to government to councils is completely knackered.

 

[internetspaceships]

Yes and this is the governments retaliation for Barclays actually not needing them, and being good at what they do.

Politics at their worst.

 

[businessfunding]

A very, very good question! I don't know. All I know is given that amount of free money I'm sure I could make a pretty handsome profit myself.

The genuinely interesting thing about these forums is how many people seem to belive that the way through the banking crisis is to recreate exactly the same mistakes that got us in to it:

Namely lending too much money, too cheaply to the wrong people.

 

[captaincloser]

Because the government are weak and feeble minded. They don't have a leg to stand on when the big bank operators walk in to the room. Cameron just gulps and shakedly puts a hand out towards his glass of water, he is in the presence of gods.

OMG..a genius idea..Lets get slack jaw Milliband and his buddy Balls into Downing Street and all will be sweetness and light as we spend spend spend our way out. It was the very poor 'light touch' regulation of Labour that got us into this dog's breakfast with the banks before you go too far down the feeble minded Cameron road. Dave is a genius.

I hope we are all saved from any Labour party cures for anything bigger than tennis elbow.

 

[Esk247]

OMG..a genius idea..Lets get slack jaw Milliband and his buddy Balls into Downing Street and all will be sweetness and light as we spend spend spend our way out. It was the very poor 'light touch' regulation of Labour that got us into this dog's breakfast with the banks before you go too far down the feeble minded Cameron road. Dave is a genius.

I hope we are all saved from any Labour party cures for anything bigger than tennis elbow.

Again, you're not bright at all.

Who said anything about Labour? Are you completely drunk on stupidity?

I said Government? All encompassing. They are all completely useless and the whole system is corrupt.

The current nonsense will lead to a few scapegoats being thrown overboard. Nothing more will be said of the matter. Always the same.

 

[internetspaceships]

Banks guys - - remember - - banks ....

 

[captaincloser]

Again, you're not bright at all.

Who said anything about Labour? Are you completely drunk on stupidity?

I said Government? All encompassing. They are all completely useless and the whole system is corrupt.

The current nonsense will lead to a few scapegoats being thrown overboard. Nothing more will be said of the matter. Always the same.

Ouch...sticks and stones ay break my bones but cruel posts....I love them. Hit me more...

Racing certaintity you dont vote ?

 

[Esk247]

Ouch...sticks and stones ay break my bones but cruel posts....I love them. Hit me more...

Racing certaintity you dont vote ?

Racing certaintity you are completely incorrect, i am not a labour supporter and have voted.

You seem to be jumping on all of my posts in every thread. Are you perhaps jealous of my dashing good looks? (see display picture).

 

[internetspaceships]

I like an evil looking bird with red eyes. Does that help?

 

[captaincloser]

Racing certaintity you are completely incorrect, i am not a labour supporter and have voted.

You seem to be jumping on all of my posts in every thread. Are you perhaps jealous of my dashing good looks? (see display picture).

Very fetching I'm sure !

I have jumped on two threads recently where we have disagreed...whaddya want..everyone to be anodine and in agreement on everything?

See my avatar..thats a photo not a drawing- I am evil, calcultaing and don't wash (but not a troll).

 

[captaincloser]

I like an evil looking bird with red eyes. Does that help?

Here you go then...

 

[leemason]

Because Barclays is still a business owned by business people. The state owned ones are owned by the politicians who put political gain in front of profit.

So based upon that analogy, which bank would you trust more with your money?

Sorry, decided to give up, go to bed, and read a good book last night!

I'd invest my money in any bank that didn't lie to me, didn't manipulate the market, and didn't deliberately con it's customers.

Sadly that doesn't exist! Barclays were just lucky that they had less exposure to the US mortgage market backed instruments that triggered the original crisis. I doubt it was anything what so ever to do with good management.

If their retail banking is anything to go by I'd hate to think how their investment banking runs. Every single encounter I have had with Barclays going back over 30 years has ended up in a complete mess. Their staff didn't even know how much you could put into a cash ISA!!!

 

[businessfunding]

I'd invest my money in any bank that didn't lie to me, didn't manipulate the market, and didn't deliberately con it's customers.

Sadly that doesn't exist! Barclays were just lucky that they had less exposure to the US mortgage market backed instruments that triggered the original crisis. I doubt it was anything what so ever to do with good management.

Saly you are probably right, though there are banks like Coop which appear to be on a higher moral plane.

If you really want to support business however, you could invest in fundingCircle?

 

[internetspaceships]

Morning Lee.

Just for the record I'm no fan of any bank, so I've got no tub thumping to do about Barclays.

I've banked with Barclays for 20 years in business and they have broken "promises" made by managers, and have messed us around on a number of occasions.

However. They have also done a lot of things right, and on balance I take the view that it's "better the devil you know" because moving to another bank means zero track record. Not withstanding the fact that I don't believe half the promises the new bank's BDM makes anyway.

We also business bank with Nat West and have found them to be reasonable, but have exactly the same issues as Barclays so where do you start?

Jon

 

[leemason]

Saly you are probably right, though there are banks like Coop which appear to be on a higher moral plane.

If you really want to support business however, you could invest in fundingCircle?

Thanks. I already invest in Zopa myself for two reasons:

1. It gives a decent return compared to savings rates.
2. It cuts out the Banks.

I'll have a look at fundingCircle.

 

[leemason]

Jon,

We do need financial institutions. And I have no specific beef about any one bank over another. But I just think that the current structure of the banks which has grown up every since de-regulation in the 1980's is calculated to produce the sorts of problems that we have had in recent years.

Every company should be accountable for it's actions. If a bank goes bust because of it's own bad management and practices it should be allow to go bust just as any other badly managed company would.

The fact is that they are still too big to fail. They need to be split up. They have become so large because of favourable Government policy towards banks. I see no reason why they should not be split up by Government policy as well. Mind you I don't trust the Government either. So I'm sort of stuck here in the middle.

 

[internetspaceships]

Aye Lee, and there's only one way to be in a situation where the banks can't stiff you, and that's to have enough money in the business so that you don't need to rely on them for anything.

I'm not sure that breaking banks into chunks that CAN fail is a good idea either.

 

[leemason]

Aye Lee, and there's only one way to be in a situation where the banks can't stiff you, and that's to have enough money in the business so that you don't need to rely on them for anything.

I'm not sure that breaking banks into chunks that CAN fail is a good idea either.

Would you prefer, via mine and your taxes, to continue to have the keep bailing them out? I agree about having enough money in the business not to have the rely on banks.

The latest bailout (disguised as money to be lent to small businesses but actually a cushion for the banks against any danger of collapse in the Euro zone or any de-grading of their credit ratings) has cost us another £140bn. A few years ago that would have been seen as a crisis but these days it's just business as usually. Just watch the size of next years bonuses. They will be even bigger than this years! And they have been huge.

 

[internetspaceships]

I'm honestly hearing what you're writing and I don't disagree with it Lee.

You're spot on with most of it. The part I don't get and have trouble reconciling is how I can change it. I cannot because I will never have the wealth or influence to do it and I cannot see that it can be done.

Even governments are forced into bailing them out as you quite rightly pointed out. Why? because to lose a major bank would crash firstly the economy in the UK and then probably the rest of Europe with the domino effect.

If governments cannot change it because they are too financially vested in the system then I have to take the approach that all I can do is work with what I've got. Hence I'm not going to even allow myself to get disgruntled about it because it's a waste of time and energy doing so.

That in itself is a bad thing, I know this but how else can I approach it?

 

[leemason]

I'm honestly hearing what you're writing and I don't disagree with it Lee.

You're spot on with most of it. The part I don't get and have trouble reconciling is how I can change it. I cannot because I will never have the wealth or influence to do it and I cannot see that it can be done.

Even governments are forced into bailing them out as you quite rightly pointed out. Why? because to lose a major bank would crash firstly the economy in the UK and then probably the rest of Europe with the domino effect.

If governments cannot change it because they are too financially vested in the system then I have to take the approach that all I can do is work with what I've got. Hence I'm not going to even allow myself to get disgruntled about it because it's a waste of time and energy doing so.

That in itself is a bad thing, I know this but how else can I approach it?

I totally agree with you that there is nothing that we ourselves can do about this. And I don't want to approach this with an attitude or righteous indignation.

I really do however think that the Government can do something about it if they want to. And splitting the banks into retail and investments sides should be a first step. The overall business ethos of these two operations is completely wrong. It's a bit like having Little Chef running the Ivy. It just doesn't work well for either party (even though an Olympic Breakfast - are they still allowed to call it that? - might go down well every so often).

The power in the banks has over time slid over to the investment side because that it where a lot of "easy" money can be made without the need to worry about a load of really annoying customers. This balance needs to be redressed. The only way that I can see this done is a complete split. I don't just mean a glass curtain between the two operations. I mean a complete de-merger of the two sides of the operation.

 

[CR2012]

I read with interest some earlier posts that the banks are businesses and here to make a profit. No difference between a bank and a business.

I do not agree. The banks are bound to act diligently, fairly and responsibly. A bank must act within the best interests of it's customers at all times. A bank must pay due regard to the information needs of it's customers.

It's all there in the FSA handbook (which exists for the protection of the consumer). The banks knew the rules...

As far as ambulance chasers are concerned, I do not see the big problem. Here's why......

Whilst I agree that some claim types can be approached directly (PPI for example) and that the claims company will take a % of the redress, let me ask a question.

Does anyone have any idea how much claims companies spend per year on marketing and 'spreading awareness' compared to all other types of coverage combined?

Do people really think that a website like Martin Lewis, a couple of full page articles in the paper and the odd TV documentary report would provide anywhere near the kind of penetration that is required to reach the sheer number of people affected by these mis-selling scadals?

The banks are certainly not shouting from the rooftops !

 

[Nitram]

The banks are settling Swap claims - but you need to prove mis-selling. This can be complex and time consuming. Fundamentally you need to prove the lack of suitability of the product & process. You can do this yourself or may can get advice. The FSA pilot scheme is moving forward very slowly and generally settlements are happening where there is the threat of litigation. Beware that if the Swap was sold more than 6 years ago things will be more difficult.