Hello all, I must confess I have not read through the many excellent posts on this site, and so I apologise if I am repeating ideas others have already thought through and rejected. I am a pupil barrister with some knowledge of contract law. I notice that a recurring theme is the inability to get a court case heard. But it is possible to sue for 'declaratory relief' on a contract: i.e. to sue for a Declaration that a term of the contract is (for example) unlawful. On the face of it, I cannot see why one could not sue for a Declaration that the term in a bank contract allowing for these charges is unlawful. One would not even need to sue for monies charged under that term to be repaid - - instead, anyone with a contract with a bank could sue for a Declaration that one of the terms is unlawful. Of course the Claimant would be liable to the bank's costs if s/he lost. But (a) that seems unlikely; (b) you could seek a Costs Capping Order limiting the amount of costs which could be incurred by each side; © CAG could get together a fund to pay the costs. Yet another way of avoiding the potential of personal bankruptcy would be to set up a limited liability company, for this very purpose, with a bank account, and then for that company to sue for a Declaration. This would be less ideal in that the company would not be able to rely on the Consumer Contracts regulations; but it could sue on the common law points relating to hidden penalty clauses. Just a thought. As I say, this may have been considered and rejected for very good reasons, but on the face of it, it is unclear to me what those reasons might be. TJ.