OFT test case

[BankFodder]

NEWS RELEASE FROM BOB EGERTON (BOB THE BANKBUSTER)

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 11 January 2008

 

OFT/BANKS TEST CASE TO BE HELD IN SMALL ROOM - OFT SPOKESMAN "DID NOT REALISE" ROOM ONLY BIG ENOUGH FOR 6 MEMBERS OF PUBLIC

Next Wednesday 16 January, the OFT and Britain's high street banks are due to meet in a High Court battle which will decide whether or not the banks are operating an unlawful charging regime. The case is of great public interest as it could result in the banks having to repay £20 billion or more to about 10 million customers. It has now been revealed that the case will be heard in a room at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in Fleet Street and that there will be space for precisely 11 members of the press and the public. A spokesperson for the centre said that entry will be on a first come first served basis but that the space will be divided roughly equally between the press and the public; and passes will be issued separately for morning and afternoon sessions. This means that, at most, 6 members of the public will be able to attend and no-one will be able to attend a full day. It will be impossible, therefore, for any one person to obtain a complete picture of the proceedings. It will also mean that many newspaper and television/radio reporters will excluded.

 

A spokesperson for the OFT claimed today that he "did not realise that the room would only hold this number of people".

 

Bob Egerton, bank charges campaigner, said, "This case is a great embarrassment to the OFT. It has exposed the institutional weakness within the OFT where it is effective at curbing unlawful behaviour by small businesses, but it does not have the stomach for a fight against the big corporations like the banks. By holding the case in such a small room, no member of the public will be able to sit through the whole case; and much of Britain's media will be excluded. The OFT is no doubt hoping that the case will receive little press coverage and that it will all quietly fizzle out. However, I and the many other campaigners will ensure that this issue does not die. We will continue to fight the banks over this issue whatever the outcome of a meeting in a tiny room in London."

 

 

...

[ukaviator]

Venue confirmed by phone, they have 11 places for press and public . .

[humbleman]

A spokesperson for the OFT claimed today that he "did not realise that the room would only hold this number of people"....

 

Just shows how what sort of C***NS they are.

[johnnyjoeflyer]

Makes you wonder what else the OFT do not realise. Bet the banks knew, how many representatives are they getting in there for this?

[alecmac18]

This really is a joke considering the millions of people who have an interest in this case. Is anyone here considering going along anyway?

[bach]

Unbeleivable, yet again hush hush and cover up. Consumer Acton Group has more fight in them.

Lynn

[mariejader]

This is unfair, anyone free to go and demonstrate outside the building? I am sure the press would be interested in that.

 

I have had a call today from the BBC radio asking me to do an interview with them next week, think this may just be dropped into the conversation also

[smashedbobo]

This is an absolute disgrace. Why should we face court as many have done with so many there and yet the banks get a little room with very few. Soooooooooo not fair. Talk about keeping things under wraps. Wrong, so very very wrong.

[smashedbobo]

Tom Brennan had to face everything thrown at him in court. With i dont know how many people for the other side. And a case this Big gets a small room big enough for 11 people. No joke. I hope one of those 11 is someone that has a very loud voice.

[Bookworm]

Huis-clos, anyone?

[Guest Wild Billy]

Does the OFT choose the venue?

[TUTTSI]

It seems that they have also changed the venue to International Dispute Resolution Centre, 70 Fleet Street EC4Y 1EU - and NOT at the High Court.

 

Now I am not an expert, how can this be a TEST CASE if it is not being held in the High Court. Also, the OFT made a statement at the begining of the TEST CASE and said that it would be held in Public not behind closed doors and this latest information is now that between press and public only 11 will be admitted and the same 11 will not neccessarily get the chance or oportunity to be able to see it through every step of the way. At least the BBC or one of the newspapers should be able to have a seat every day to record the progress or not as the case may be.

 

 

DS

[TUTTSI]

Tom Brennan is on BBC on Monday on the morning show regarding the OFT case.

 

I will be up in the City on Friday, 3 minutes walk away from this venue so I may just pop along during my lunch time to have a snoop about and mingle with the press, and find out what is happening and if I get any snippets I will report back.

 

Are we planning any protest....

[alecmac18]

2 Questions: If anyone knows the answer I'd be very grateful.

 

1. Can an injunction be put in place since the case is no longer being held in public.? (techincally it may be but in practice it is not).

 

2. Will a transcript of the proceedings be available?

 

 

...and where is CRFX? We could use a few of your comments now.

[RETURNED TO SENDER]

Why dont they move it to somewhere bigger ?

[alecmac18]

I suppose the questions is: Why did they make so sure that the case is essentially being held in private?

[alecmac18]

Hi all,

 

I've just heard:

 

The new venue is actually part of the Royal Courts of Justice and is actually twice the size and not the other way round

 

The hearing will be held under High Court rules and procedures and not arbitration rules as some people

are speculating.

 

 

so its not looking too bad.

[Castlebest]

the case is still effectively being held in private, the public/press seats are being allocated on a first come first served basis for both morning and afternoon sessions so no one, press or public will be able to sit through the whole hearing.

 

good grief my stay appeal in brum was in a full court room bigger than this room.

 

if the venue cant be changed I think the seats should be allocated to the media and the consumer watchdogs on a full time basis. or maybe its time we went american and put a live feed into the room if the court is like brum it has data feeds there already.

 

What do you think dave and webby?

[Guest Wild Billy]

So choosing the venue has nothing to do with the OFT or the Banks. Glad we cleared that up.

 

Was anyone actually taking 8 days out of their life to sit through this? If you weren't then it seems a pretty dumb thing to complain about. Do you think there is going to be some underhand deal cut in the courtroom? You have all the documentation that both sides will be relying on but I bet 99.9% of people haven;t even bothered to read that from cover to cover. And I would assume neither the public nor the press will be allowed in when any commercially sensitive market information is being discussed anyway.

 

At times like this, you would think CAG might actually rally behind the organisation trying to take on the banks. That would be the sensible approach but I guess it's more British to keep sniping at them. "The OFT has moved the court case"! Think about it!

[car2403]

So choosing the venue has nothing to do with the OFT or the Banks. Glad we cleared that up.

 

Was anyone actually taking 8 days out of their life to sit through this? If you weren't then it seems a pretty dumb thing to complain about. Do you think there is going to be some underhand deal cut in the courtroom? You have all the documentation that both sides will be relying on but I bet 99.9% of people haven;t even bothered to read that from cover to cover. And I would assume neither the public nor the press will be allowed in when any commercially sensitive market information is being discussed anyway.

 

At times like this, you would think CAG might actually rally behind the organisation trying to take on the banks. That would be the sensible approach but I guess it's more British to keep sniping at them. "The OFT has moved the court case"! Think about it!

 

The whole point of CAG is that we DON'T have to bother doing all this - we (including me!) get support from others that have information that will assist OUR claims.

 

How do you know CAG aren't involved? I've seen nothing to suggest that here.

 

It's posts like this that bring threads like this down - it's designed to give essential information to those that may not have access to it otherwise, as they are ordinary people living ordinary lives that may just be touched by the decision made in this case.

 

Do you work for the Banks, by any chance? If so, say so and stand up - all opinions are welcome. (Just be aware you are in the minority here) If you don't, where do you lie on the issue? (Just in case I have misunderstood your reasoning here)

[Guest Wild Billy]

The whole point of CAG is that we DON'T have to bother doing all this - we (including me!) get support from others that have information that will assist OUR claims.

 

Really? That's the WHOLE point? I misunderstood.

 

How do you know CAG aren't involved? I've seen nothing to suggest that here.

 

We've established CAG isn't involved. Keep up. All I've seen here is people suggesting there be protests that the case has been moved to a smaller court. Which we've now established is untrue and based on some e-mail from Bob "The Builder"!

 

It's posts like this that bring threads like this down - it's designed to give essential information to those that may not have access to it otherwise, as they are ordinary people living ordinary lives that may just be touched by the decision made in this case.

 

Define essential information. Is it giving out false information about cases being moved to smaller rooms? Is it suggesting there should be a protest based on that false information?

 

Do you work for the Banks, by any chance? If so, say so and stand up - all opinions are welcome. (Just be aware you are in the minority here) If you don't, where do you lie on the issue? (Just in case I have misunderstood your reasoning here)

 

You've invalidated your whole post with this. Did you read what I actually said? You've just recycled the tired old argument used here when someone challenges the status quo. No, I definitely don't work for the banks. I just take the time to inform myself and don't rely on others to do it for me or tell me what to think. You know, like when the Daily Mail underlines words in their headlines.

[mariejader]

Originally Posted by Wild Billy

 

At times like this, you would think CAG might actually rally behind the organisation trying to take on the banks. That would be the sensible approach but I guess it's more British to keep sniping at them. "The OFT has moved the court case"! Think about it!

 

How do you know that CAG are not doing anything about this!!!! Bankfodder, Dave and all the mods site helpers etc and all the people who help run this site don't shout about what they are doing beleive me, I know their work load is massive and don't forget most of them also work full time, personally I don't know how they manage it. I cannot thank them enought for all the help and support they give us all.

[Guest Wild Billy]

How do you know that CAG are not doing anything about this!!!! Bankfodder, Dave and all the mods site helpers etc and all the people who help run this site don't shout about what they are doing beleive me, I know their work load is massive and don't forget most of them also work full time, personally I don't know how they manage it. I cannot thank them enought for all the help and support they give us all.

 

Then I would encourage them to say what they are doing. If I'm wrong then I'll say I'm wrong.

 

However, I as actually referring to the wider CAG community- the people posting here. Why you would continually attack the organisation about to go into battle for you is beyond me. Is that how you would send your troops into war? "We hate your guts, will protest against you... but, er, if you could win the war that would be appreciated".

[car2403]

Really? That's the WHOLE point? I misunderstood.

 

 

 

We've established CAG isn't involved. Keep up. All I've seen here is people suggesting there be protests that the case has been moved to a smaller court. Which we've now established is untrue and based on some e-mail from Bob "The Builder"!

 

 

 

Define essential information. Is it giving out false information about cases being moved to smaller rooms? Is it suggesting there should be a protest based on that false information?

 

 

 

You've invalidated your whole post with this. Did you read what I actually said? You've just recycled the tired old argument used here when someone challenges the status quo. No, I definitely don't work for the banks. I just take the time to inform myself and don't rely on others to do it for me or tell me what to think. You know, like when the Daily Mail underlines words in their headlines.

 

That's us agreeing to disagree then.

 

BTW, there is no right or wrong opinion - just opinion. Mine is different to yours, which I accept.

 

Then I would encourage them to say what they are doing. If I'm wrong then I'll say I'm wrong.

 

However, I as actually referring to the wider CAG community- the people posting here. Why you would continually attack the organisation about to go into battle for you is beyond me. Is that how you would send your troops into war? "We hate your guts, will protest against you... but, er, if you could win the war that would be appreciated".

 

That's exactly what happened though, isn't it? The Country goes to War and those that didn't want to protest against it. This is a "free speech" Country - and CAG is no different, IMHO.

 

You can't please everyone all the time.

 

[Penfold92]

Readers of this may be interested in following this link and joining in?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/126477-prime-minitsers-website.html

 

Penfold