I think the problem is the vast majority of people do not understand the very complex nature of banking revenue and are quick to make assupmtions that something is unjust simply because it is costing them money. The fact of the matter is the bank is providing a service to that customer and in providing said service they should be expected to pay. It is simple market forces of supply and demand. We have for far too long been used to easy access to credit and competition among banks has meant that the cost of this has been pushed down, in retail banking to an almost unprofitable level, and the recent financial turmoil has re-adjusted the market to a more balanced level.

With regards to your 'fine' I think you will find this is a renewal fee, one he doesn't have to pay if he doesn't want the overdraft, he is simply paying for a service the bank is providing and one which the FOS would agree is fully justifiable to charge. This would not have been without notice and would have given him fair warning and time to make alternative arrangements.

With regards this particular bank if you read any financial press you would realise it has required no Government or taxpayer bailouts and has indeed faired particulary well amongst its peers in the last 12 months. As well as posting a profit, yes PROFIT, last year of over $10bn.