From: Peter Saxton 
Newsgroups: uk.finance
Subject: Re: Unauthorised Overdraft Charges
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:05:34 +0100

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:55:56 GMT, Ronald Raygun
 wrote:

>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.
>
If you say 4 statements and I insert a comment after the 4th statement
most people would understand I am commenting on the 4th statement
unless it is obvious.

I suspect you are avoiding answering because you know you are wrong.
You've been taking lessons from Tim!

>>>> 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.
>
My bank manager knows more about me than someone who had a quick
glance at my account activity.

>> 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.

I'm talking about the bank blaming an employee despite not having a
good system set up.

-- 
Peter Saxton from London
peter@petersaxton.co.uk