Come on, you know what I mean! The one who gets regular windfalls from their large share options, who arranges all the ski trips, collects the kitty money and who always ultimately benefits by taking the lead. The one we’re grateful to for getting that fantastic group together and sorting all the logistics and who probably manages to get a free holiday out of it. We ignore that and the fact that when it’s their round they’re either at the loo or buy you half a lager instead of your tipple of choice because it’s cheaper.
We do this because we can get on with running our lives and just turn up and have a fantastic holiday. It works for both parties. This situation is akin to the role of the banks, they get on with delivering the services and over-charge for it but we get to focus on ourselves, our family and friends and have fun. We don’t have to think very much about it all.
Then, out of the blue, we realise that there aren’t enough funds for the holiday because the guy who collected the money for the ski trip, instead of purchasing the holiday, put the money down as a deposit on a Ferrari. Not only are we potentially missing out on a holiday but we’ve now got to pay for it anyway because the company (or Government to extend the metaphor) is on our back because of our friend’s mismanagement. Turns out he gave them our name and passport number so we have no option but to pay again but we can’t really afford it and it negatively impacts our significant priorities. What would happen to the friend? Well he wouldn’t be a friend anymore. We wouldn’t trust him and we’d probably make sure we never had to have any dealings with him again in the future.
So what choices do we have in relation to the banking sector? The largest Co-op’s and the Friendly Societies aren’t what they used to be since deregulation. As far as I’m aware much of the original values they stood for have been all but lost and they act much like the rest of the banking system. The small ones appear structurally to be run like Masonic lodges or trade unions rather than providing a valid contemporary option. For my part, I’ll be investigating more widely but if anyone reading this has experience of an alternative, truly ‘ethical’ bank, I’d love to hear from you. In fact, pass on my details, I think they could benefit from some good PR and awareness raising!
So it seems like, on the whole, we can’t turn our back on that ‘friend’ because we’d be very lonely and have no group to go skiing with. We’d probably just fume for the whole holiday but try to put it out of our mind (some might even ask if they could borrow the friend’s Ferrari for the weekend when it arrives by way of compensation!).
On the “ethical” point, the FT has recently reported that Santander is quietly trying to sell off 3bn euro of re-possessed homes. This revelation has come to light in the same week the “ethical banking code” was announced (created by bankers for bankers you no doubt noted). I suspect the banks have been busy getting in lots of ‘unethical’ charges in during the last month to make the most of the ‘free rein’ they’ve generally enjoyed.
An example of this ‘free rein’ is an ‘unauthorised overdraft’. If I went into a shop to buy something for £7 and only had £5 in my pocket, the £2 wouldn’t magically appear in my pocket. The teller wouldn’t say, well now that we’ve manifested £2 in your pocket, that will be £37 please – what?! I’d walk away and make a decision to get the extra £2 I need or decide not to buy the goods. Damn right it’s an 'unauthorised overdraft', it’s a blank cheque for the bank written by the bank but they report haughtily that somehow it was at ‘our’ instigation. You’re very naughty taking an ‘unauthorised overdraft’! Am I? I don’t remember asking you to cover the cost of this if there wasn’t enough funds in my account – I’m confused – unauthorised by who – you or me!?
Some of our other ‘friends’, when they think they have an opportunity to make a charge, stop all correspondence and statements. What if you, when in the queue to buy your goods, realised that the guy behind you had secretly reached into your pocket and taken £2 so that you didn’t have the right money in the first place? Wouldn’t you have a stand up row with him right there and then or be so overwhelmed with indignation, punch him on the nose? Somehow, when it’s displayed as figures on a piece of paper or computer screen and hidden from us, we tend to let it go and I’m sure they’re aware of that which is why it’s now almost impossible to ‘talk’ to these people either face to face or by telephone.
They seem to think we’re all stupid (or too busy to notice). The real probability however is that they are just so completely complacent about their ‘perceived’ power they don’t care either way. To be fair, they’ve done a pretty good job at limiting our options and continue to do so. The recent revolt by ‘middle England’ against the banking sector’s desire for the abolition of cheques is a recent example of their misguided perception.
Maybe they’re right however....how long are we going to be forced to go on holiday with the friend that ripped us off because of inertia or lack of time and interest? Funny how that word ‘interest’ meaning attention and awareness is the same word used to take cash from us because of our lack of it!
Charging “interest” - how ironic!
