Scottish Daily Mail

Enticed into a debt trap

- By Victoria Bischoff v.bischoff@dailymail.co.uk

SHOULD banks be allowed to offer you credit if you have never asked for it?

We all know how easy it is to be tempted by an enticing advert for something we don’t really need.

But there is a big difference between waving a new pair of trainers under someone’s nose and encouragin­g them to saddle themselves with thousands of pounds of debt.

After all, taking out a personal loan is something that requires some serious thought, so you know you can afford the repayments should your circumstan­ces suddenly change.

It is not something you should apply for on a whim. Yet, as we reveal on Page 43, some lenders are casually enticing customers into taking out loans larger than their annual salaries.

Banks insist that they only market loans to customers who have opted in to receiving correspond­ence from the firm.

But this is disingenuo­us. It’s far more likely that they ticked a box on a form when they opened their current account and never realised a torrent of seductive advertisin­g would follow.

Banks should have to be far more explicit when seeking permission to send out offers for loans or credit cards — particular­ly given that the rates they are offering are typically not even close to the best on the market. In many cases, customers aren’t even guaranteed to get the rate advertised, as a marketing loophole means banks are obliged to offer this to only 51 pc of successful applicants.

Britain has a well-documented debt problem. So as we head into the spendthrif­t festive season, lenders should be encouragin­g responsibl­e borrowing — not handing out expensive credit like it’s chocolate money.

Vigilant NatWest

AfTer months of reporting horror stories about the way banks treat fraud victims, it was reassuring to get this note in praise of NatWest from Money Mail reader Ivan in Wiltshire.

He says that after transferri­ng two significan­t sums of cash to savings accounts with other banks, he received a prompt call from NatWest’s anti-fraud team checking he had not been coerced into doing so. Ivan says: ‘The payments had been flagged up on their system and blocked until their integrity had been checked with me. All praise to NatWest for preventing what could have been a fraud and protecting my money.’

It shows just how swiftly banks can move when they want to.

Fighting fraud

WHILe we’re on the topic of fraud, a quick update.

A consultati­on on new rules spelling out what banks must do to prevent customers falling victim to fraud closed last week.

We submitted a response on behalf of every reader who has raised concerns about Britain’s growing fraud epidemic.

In it, we called for banks to refund victims until an official compensati­on scheme can be agreed, tougher checks to stop fraudsters opening accounts, and a better balance between the speed and safety of payments. We attached dozens of your letters and emails (without any personal details included) to hammer home how devastatin­g fraud can be.

It is now down to the steering group of bank and consumer group representa­tives to agree on a final code of conduct. Please, please ensure it goes far enough.

Shameless Virgin

ee and Virgin were fined £6.3million and £7 million respective­ly last week after overchargi­ng thousands of customers when they left their contracts early.

Yet while ee graciously paid up, Virgin threw its toys out the pram and vowed to appeal.

If I were Virgin, I’d be keeping my head down. Ofcom has just dropped its investigat­ion into the firm’s policy of charging customers hefty exit fees when they move to an area it does not supply.

Given that Virgin provides a service for only half the country, it’s incredibly disappoint­ing Ofcom has chosen to let it off the hook.

 ??  ?? MONEY MAIL EDITOR
MONEY MAIL EDITOR

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom