HSBC rant

But it does make sense for banks and other FIs to cut costs by doing it like that and the industry is very competitive.

And it doesnt cost much to have one of the cheaper smartphones.

You are not compelled to use HSBC. Other banks are available.

There are Android emulators if you insist on going down this path.

Nothing wrong with choice. There are other banks.

At a guess, you pay off your credit card balance in full every month ?

To the CC companies you're known as a "deadbeat" and apart from defaulters you're their worst type of customer as they can't gouge you for interest every month. Sure they still get merchant fees but they mainly cover costs on charge free cards; its the interest charges they're interested in.

Many such customers have actually had their credit limits reduced.

bb

A. I don't want to carry something around with me that contains lots of personal data. 'Phones get lost or stolen. B. I should not be forced to have a 'smartphone' to carry out basic banking operations which have no direct relationship to mobile telephony. It's similar to being forced to have a smart meter, and we have recently seen how they can be mis-used by the owning supplier.

But I didn't know that there would be this problem when I took out my first account with them in 1968.

If that was the case the bank would charge accordingly. Someone who pays their balance every month is a good bet, and payment never needs chasing.

In addition to that, some cards offer a small level of cashback with purchases, as well as allowing you top pay the balance in whole.

You're not. There are other banks. Mine doesn't stipulate a smart phone, even though I have one.

Please do provide examples.

No one can get any personal data out of a phone that you don't put personal data on. And the better phones don't allow your personal data to be stolen from them even if they are lost or stolen.

No one is forcing you, you are free to use a bank that has call centers and pay for the cost of running those.

That is a lie.

Why would anyone let alone a bank want to lend money to people entirely interest free ?

When they could be lending that same money to custiomers who'd not only generate the same merchant fees, but pay interest as well ?

The fact that they know they're going to get paid is immaterial as the level of default is already incorporated into the interst rates they charge

"Allowing you to", sure. They're not going to make it too obvious are they ? In the absence of specific charges, banks make their money by charging borrowers interest, always have done, always will.

bb

You are free to change to another bank if you don't like how they operate now.

To get the monthly fee and the merchant fees.

They aren't short of money to lend so they can have both, and do.

Banks have previously paid interest on money on deposit and hardly pay anything anymore.

There is no monthly fee.

These borrowers experiences matched my own. Paid off every month for over 20 years. Except my own limit was much lower - at my own request - and I needed to raise it by just £500 for one month to pay my car insurance. No dice. Numerous telephone calls at the end of which I even got a letter explaining this wouldn't refelect on my credit rating. As if I cared. I just used it for the convenience

quote:

Many customers have reported that Barclaycard is cutting their limit even though they haven't missed any payments and have steady finances.

" We spoke to one Barclaycard customer, Jon, a semi-retired television producer who told us: 'I've had a Barclaycard

again

They have reduced my limit by 98% from 16k to 250. Perfect credit history and had the card a decade which has been managed perfectly... being used and paid every month. Pointless having the card now as I can spend that in one transaction

unquote

Only no one will admit the real reason in print including it would seem "Which"

bb

Have we? Do tell.

Tim

In the olden days those same people would have been put on a pay as you go meter but would have taken a lot longer when the debt was greater. They tend to be much more expensive because it's both the cost of the electricity and paying off the unpaid debt for electricity used in the past.

You should go and find the Youtube video where a guy rants on about the evils of smart meters. He has all the documentation and links for every point he makes. "Electricity cost twice as much after you have a smart meter fitted" referring to a woman when suddenly found that on the smart meter installation her previous meter was read for the first time in years to find she owed thousands. "Smart meters emit pulses causing cancer" "They catch fire and blow up" etc.

True as that might be, and I am not denying it, it still does not excuse the companies from not following the rules about switching the meters remotely, after due consultation, etc etc. And how clearly is that possibility explained in the T&Cs? I bet it's not brought up in any conversation about the meters when they are being discussed before installation. "Oh, by the way, we can switch your meter to a Pay-As-You-Go meter if we feel you deserve it".

That's not misuse, that is doing what makes sense if the customer refused to pay what they owe.