From: Ronald Raygun 
Subject: Re: Unauthorised Overdraft Charges
Newsgroups: uk.finance
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:55:56 GMT

Peter Saxton wrote:

> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 12:29:36 GMT, Ronald Raygun
>  wrote:
>>Peter Saxton wrote:
>>> 
>>> Why is it so difficult to understand?
>>
>>Evidently because of your lack of appropriate snipping.
>>
>>If you quote me saying "zxvbn asdfgh" and reply "exactly", I must assume
>>you mean your "exactly" to apply to the whole "zxvbn asdfgh", and when
>>that doesn't make sense and I query it, you seem astonished I didn't
>>read your mind and realised you only meant it to apply to "fgh".
>>
> I would say that you say too many different things in one paragraph
> then. You babbled and then make a statement so I say "exactly" to the
> statement and you wonder if I am saying "exactly" to some babbling!

It is normal to say many things in a paragraph.  It even happens that
one says many things in just a sentence.  It's up to you to remove
those things you're not specifically repying to.

>>> I hope that is easy to understand!
>>
>>It just seems a bit of a waste of time to make decision in advance which
>>will, more often than not, turn out to have been unnecessary.  No-one
>>these days actually "knows the customer", and someone should always be
>>available who could make a decision on the basis of a quick glance at
>>recent account activity.
> 
> I disagree. To what? To all of it!

One disagrees *with* something, not *to* it.

> You really think that a bank would want a situation where someone
> makes a decision based on a quick glance at recent account activity?

I can't imagine it being done any other way, because *NOBODY* at the
bank *really* knows anything about me, or about any other customer,
with the possible exception of the few dozen most important customers
of the branch.

> I would not propose such a system. I prefer managers giving a flag for
> a certain overdraft on the understanding if there's an event that
> requires a change in the flag it is done and the manager is held
> responsible if it is not done.

I suspect the flags are set by computers these days, based on general
criteria of account behaviiour, and managers have only very little input
to the decision making process.

> I'm not in favour blaming someone after they took a "quick glance at
> recent account activity"!

It's up to them how they make their decisions.  You should always blame
them if they get them wrong, no matter how they arrived at them.