backfoot:

I have benefitted from free banking since I was around 18 and the judgment may well change that position in the months/years to come. I don't share the view that the people penalised by punitive charges shouldn't have brought their case. There is an overall pot of services supplied by the banks in administering their networks,providing premises to transact and for the administration of a wide range of services.The trouble is there is currently an inequateable way of paying for all these services.If I pay ten direct debits/ten cheques/ten over the counter transactions and remain in credit,then I get all that for free.If I fail to keep in credit,due to an error,unforseen circumstances,or delays in receipt of my income,then I get penalised heavily and end up paying for all the credit balance people to have free banking.Yet we have essentially used the same services.If I go overdrawn charge me a reasonable competive rate but don't levy hefty penalties on me,it is likely to quickly spiral even worse.

The banks unfortunately have exploited this charging mechanism increasingly over the years to the extent that everyone now realises that the individual punitive charges do not bear any semblance to the actual costs of those events.Those affected have rightly said enough is enough and are trying to redress the imbalance.

Some including me have had it so good for many years, but putting aside my self interest, it will be interesting to see what system they come up within the competitve environment to probably fleece us all rather than the minority.

Pretty much everything I have to say regarding this matter is summed up in this post. Good work!