26.12.2013 Views

Salz Review - Wall Street Journal

Salz Review - Wall Street Journal

Salz Review - Wall Street Journal

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Salz</strong> <strong>Review</strong><br />

An Independent <strong>Review</strong> of Barclays’ Business Practices<br />

62<br />

Treatment of Customers<br />

6.39 We consider below particular challenges that Barclays has faced in balancing the need<br />

to treat customers and clients fairly with other (e.g., financial) objectives. These are<br />

examples of conflicts that will arise from time to time in ordinary dealings with<br />

customers. One relates to the retail bank, and the other to the investment bank.<br />

Charges for Credit Cards and Overdrafts<br />

6.40 The charges levied on customers for exceeding credit card limits and for<br />

unauthorised overdrafts on their current accounts have led to customer complaints,<br />

media campaigns, regulatory, OFT and government intervention, and legal battles<br />

involving the UK’s largest banks.<br />

6.41 At the heart of the problem is the sense that these charges are often high to enable<br />

banks to recoup the costs of not charging for other services: credit card users mostly<br />

pay no fees if they clear their outstanding balances promptly; and personal current<br />

accounts are free if in credit, as is the use of ATMs. There is therefore potentially an<br />

element of cross-subsidy involved with some charges, which raises challenging<br />

fairness issues for the banks.<br />

6.42 The first issue relates to credit card fees. The OFT, following a detailed review,<br />

declared in 2006 that “credit card default charges have generally been set at a<br />

significantly higher level than is legally fair”. The OFT estimated that this had<br />

involved unlawful penalty charges in excess of £300 million a year and said that, if<br />

default charges exceeded £12, it would “presume that they are unfair”. 103<br />

Accordingly, card issuers reviewed their charges, and Barclaycard, along with other<br />

issuers, reduced their charges to £12. Prior to 2006, Barclaycard had charged £20 to<br />

£24 per month.<br />

6.43 In addition, the UK Government reached agreement with the industry in January<br />

2011 on changes which included paying off the most expensive debt first and<br />

allowing customers to decline increases in their credit limit or even to reduce it.<br />

6.44 As a major UK card issuer, the cost of making these changes for Barclaycard was<br />

significant. Barclays also received customer complaints regarding credit card fees and<br />

charges and prior to 2012, compensating some customers. In 2012, Barclays<br />

calculated a cost-based justification of its £12 card default fee and does not expect to<br />

have to meet fee complaints in future.<br />

6.45 We have also considered the much publicised issue of UK current account charges.<br />

In its report into the UK current account market (published in 2008), the OFT<br />

concluded that “the … market is not working well for consumers. A combination of<br />

complexity and lack of transparency means that consumers and competition are<br />

focused almost exclusively on more visible fees, and not on the less visible elements<br />

103 Office of Fair Trading (OFT), “Current credit card default charges unfair” (68/06), press release, 5 April<br />

2006.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!