Way to go!

We need someone to do something like that in this country to shake up the banks and Congress to do something about the outrageous way they take advantage of customers.

Customer sends bailiffs in to seize bank’s computers

A man who was fed up with paying massive bank charges decided to give one of the high street giants a taste of its own medicine.

When Royal Bank of Scotland refused to refund £3,400 charges that Declan Purcell believed he was owed, he sent in the bailiffs.

Stunned customers at his branch of RBS watched as debt collectors seized four computers, two fax machines and a till filled with cash.

The branch manager was told that the items would be sold unless RBS came up with the money owed to Mr Purcell.

Only when the manager gave an undertaking that the debt would be paid did the bailiffs leave.

Mr Purcell said: “I think the bank was pretty shocked when the bailiffs went in. But my view is that this is exactly what they would have done to me.”

  1. Jägermeister says:

    Way to go. 😀

  2. Paul says:

    I’ve recently (successfully) claimed back exorbitant charges from the UK bank Alliance & Leicester – the legal point being that the charges are out of proportion by the costs incurred by the bank concerned for small transgressions of overdrafts etc. Any UK readers should check out http://www.moneysavingexpert.com for info.

  3. Improbus says:

    Way to stick it to the man! Bravo!!! [golf clap]

  4. JPD says:

    This guy is awesome, and to think England wastes knighthood on the likes of people like Paul McCartney. It should be “Sir” Declan Purcell. GOOD JOB!!!!

  5. joshua says:

    #2…Paul…..I recently read of a man in the UK that took his bank or threatened to, to court over those charges. The Bank backed down very quickly because they don’t want a case on record that they could lose.

    When they last overhauled our banking laws here, one of the provisions was banks were only allowed to charge what it costs for it to cover overdrafts. But the law left it up to the banks to decide the cost. One of my buddies at university recently was .49 cents overdrawn on a check…..before he could go to the bank to make a deposit the bank charged him a 24.00 overdraft fee, plus a 7.00 a day cost for each day he was overdraft. He was at the bank on the first day, after 3 p.m. so they hit him with 24 bucks plus 14 bucks for the **2 days** even though it was only 1. That is just out and out fraud and robbery.

  6. Paul says:

    #5… Joshua… ouch… that’s not dissimilar to common practice here but as far as I understand the reason banks are now being challenged is that there’s consumer law that prevents banks making these charges an unreasonable penalty. Unfortunately there’s nothing to say what a reasonable charge is but those cases that have gone to court have ruled that the types of charges you outline are out of proportion to the costs to the bank itself: those costs being the automated printing of a letter usually and the financial impact of one being 49 cents (or pence) over an overdraft limit.

    You’re quite right that banks in the UK aren’t generally letting these things get to court as to do so would set precedent for future cases. In my situation where I was a couple of £s over my limit my first letter was rebuffed; as soon as I suggested I would go to court they backed down.

  7. Billabong says:

    It is called predatory lending and is a legal form of theft.The banks own Hillary Clinton.Her first vote was for the Bankruptcy law her husband vetoed two years before.They are the most profitabe businesses in the world and have to be stopped.God Bless W.C.Fields.

  8. Thomas Johnson says:

    We can do the same thing here. You sue the bank or other offending agency in small claims court; a venue which law prohibits them from sending an attorney. With luck, nobody there will know how to deal with it, and they will either ignore it, in which case you win by default; or, they send an attorney, which is the first question you ask. Again you win the case, provided you have one with proof to back it up.

    Once you have a judgment, you file an OEX, aka; Order of Examination, which is a form of Subpoena Duces Tecum. This verifies the assets with which they will pay.

    If they still refuse to pay, you have the sheriff do a Till Tap, wherein a deputy goes to the establishment owing you the debt and opens the register and takes the money out. The even better news is that they also have to pay the added fees for filing and sheriff’s dept. time and resources

  9. Kal says:

    Why single out Hillary Clinton? The Republican-controlled house and senate passed the bill, and it was wholeheartedly signed by GW Bush. Republicans are all about what’s best for big business, not what’s best for working people.

  10. Matthew says:

    This story is wrong. Look at newscounter.com to find out more


Bad Behavior has blocked 5255 access attempts in the last 7 days.