This would make perfect sense. One of Lloyds's stated strategys is to cross sell like mad. It hardly works if all that their customers phone up about is bank charges. And you cant sell a life policy to an irate customer. Added to the churn that they must be getting from people closing their accounts and you could see why it would make sense to break from the pack and strike out on their own. I bet they will say that they are voluntarily returning all cahrges over £12 and will not make any new charges. Back up by much PR and new Ad campaign.

In some cases if you take a cash advance then you can be charged interest immediately.

In Clive Briault's world banks are poor lambs who need protection....... He says' "We believe it is not in the interests of all consumers for complaints to continue to be dealt with in the current inconsistent way. So then he...... STOPS people claiming for charges that may be illegal. This affects many people who are slowly going insolvent, bankrupt etc..as a result of their bank robbing them over the years. And he also....... ALLOWS banks to continue to charge people (even though the charges may be illegal) Treating Customers Fairly? No wait - heres the best bit - technically banks dont actually have to abide by the FSA TREATING CUSTOMERS FAIRLY RULES - So that OK then? The Future: I see an executive office.....at......a major UK bank.. Surprise Surprise. Its time to get this guy in court room or get him out of his (government) office. Want to fix it Clive? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/113025-open-letter-fsa.html

And what about people who started their claim back in JAN/FEB/MARCH. Some of these people were then told in July that their back no longer had to deal with their complaint. Thus the banks that took the longest to process complaints gained the most from this wavier. Fair? Not even fair to some of the banks that dealt with claims fast. Fair to customers and people who had their accounts robbed: Not a chance.

The long and the short of it is the FSA issue the wavier for the benefit of banks and no one else. Why can the banks still debit your account for charges that are potentially illegal. Yet you can't claim them back. British Justice at its finest courtesy of the F S A.

Plain crazy? It certainly is. If the FSA lifts its wavier on SEPT 28th then you can get on with claiming. If not. It looks like a judicial review of their decision will be taking place. Believe me - if this happens then it is almost certain that they will be found wanting. It beggers belief that they would reach a conculusion that goes something like: Bank charges may be unfair....so.....we'll stop people claiming them back......and allow banks to keep charging them......and we'll drag it out in court for 5 years....haha Corruption? Back Handers? Offers of jobs at said banks? We'll soon see........

Did you know? There is nothing stopping the FOS from looking into your claim for bank charges. True: The FSA asked them to stop. Hovever there is nothing stopping them from going against this decison.They have just decided not to continue. Impartial? I think not. They know who pays their bills (the banks) Actually - one of the conditions of the wavier remaining in place is that the FOS stops processing complaints. If the FOS continued with complaints in defiance of the FSA then the FSA (under its own conditions) would have to life the wavier. Are the FOS doing this. Are they heck.

Charges that are potentially illegal are still being taken from your account. What can you do about it? Nothing. The FSA has allowed this to happen. The blame must lie squarely with them. The FSA recently granted the major UK banks a wavier which allowed them to stop processing complaints for bank charges. This was done without consultation with consumer groups, debt management firms, claims firms, the CAG and so on.... If they had asked they would have found out the sheer depth of the abuses that banks are inflicting on ordinary people. The ONLY people who were asked what they wanted were the banks. The Banks Said: We would like to stop paying claims please. BUT we still want to be able to charge people. The FSA says: No problem at all. When the very legality of the charges is in question - how can it be fair to stop claims but allow the banks to keep charging? Major UK banks could simply stop charges by pressing a few computer keys. Instead they will allow you to pay a direct debit for 5 minutes before they cancel it and charge you up to £40. Then when that £40 takes you into the red they will charge you £40 again. What they could do is just not pay the DD in the first place. Did you know - 2 UK banks have invested in computer systems that calculate how to extract the maximium amount of money from you in DD and Overdraft charges. Thats why some people have claims that run into £1000's. The FSA will review whether the wavier it granted the banks at the beginning of AUG 2007 was fair. The results of this review are due to be announced on SEPT 28th. Make no mistake: The only thing standing between you and your claim is this FSA wavier. The OFT and the Courts have practically nothing to do with it. Will the FSA lift the wavier? If they have half a brain they will because any judicial review will find against them. The time to contact them is now. Tell them what you think.

Pat-Uk. the problem is that when you get a DD charge your bank account has actually gone into an overdraft (briefly) so it still comes under the unauthorised OD charges. I know it seems stupid (because the bank will temporarily put you into an unauthorised overdraft, charge you a fee, and then reverse the Direct Debit) - but bank have to make a profit you know. Its much easier now that robbery has been legalised. Did you know: Even the Inland Revenue cant take money from your account without your permission (yet). Yet banks can still take money from your account that is potentially illegal. Shocking! Yes. Why Yes it is. However so toothless are our regulators.........banks can literally print money.

Not only was the wavier unfair and against the best interests of consumers from the start - but the banks that it was given to have not even complied with its conditions: Banks/building societies: Banks/building societies will not have to meet the requirements on time limits for dealing with any complaint which relates to unauthorised overdraft charges during the duration of the waiver. A bank/building society will still have to acknowledge the complaint within 5 days of receipt, but the normal time limits for handling complaints will not apply. Banks/building societies will have to comply with a number of conditions set out by the FSA in the waiver, including: Banks/building societies must communicate with complainants, potential complainants and other customers in a way that is clear, fair and not misleading; Banks/building societies will have to keep proper records; and Banks/building societies need to have processes in place to deal with complaints in an orderly and efficient manner once the waiver expires and complaints handling restarts. Seperate Hardship cases from ordinary cases. What do CAG members think about the above conditions? Has your bank even been complying with the UNFAIR WAVIER?

5. How will the FSA ensure all the conditions of the waiver are being met? We will review the waiver in two months to ensure the criteria for granting the waiver are being met, including whether banks and building societies are complying with the conditions set out in the direction. If we are not satisfied that these criteria are being met after two months or at any time after that, we can revoke the waiver. For individual firms, senior management is responsible for its activities and for ensuring its business complies with our regulatory requirements and this will be monitored through our normal supervisory procedures. Why the wavier in the first place? The waiver is initially being granted for one year, or until the resolution of the test case. We will review it after two months to ensure that there is a stay of proceedings in the courts of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland; the FOS is not proceeding with cases about unauthorised overdraft charges until resolution of the test case; that firms granted the waiver are complying with the conditions; and, more generally, the continuation of the waiver remains appropriate. Note to the FSA: The continuation of this wavier is now COMPLETELY INAPPROPIATE.

CRFX250 - you are a genius - a judical review is exactly what is required. Here is the FSA flowchart for deciding when to issue waviers. http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/waivers/wpf.pdf As you can see the banks need to apply for the wavier themselves. Have we already clarified whether the banks applied for the wavier of whether it was granted without consultation with the banks? Also a FOI request should be able to drag up the minutes of the FSA committe and and notes on consideration of the case issues. (you would think anyway). I applaud you on the judical review. But I've got a strange feeling that the FSA will issue a statement on SEPT 28th to try digg themselves out of the massive hole they have found themselves in.

Dear Sirs, Over the next four weeks you have some important decisions to make. You recently gave the main UK clearing banks a wavier which allowed them to disregard your own complaint procedures and to put claims on hold for bank penalty charges. This might have flown but you (incredibly) allowed the same banks to continue charging while the OFT geared itself up for a High Court test case into the legality of these charges. When the very legality of these charges comes into question, how is it that you allow the banks to keep charging people? A sensible option would be to hold on ALL claims and charges pending the test case. Unfortunately this would have hit bank profits to such a degree that the angry phone calls from them would have been worse than the ones from CAG. But now you're stirred up a hornets nest. The banks are still not happy (they see the writing on the wall). Customers are clearly not happy. What are you going to do? Here are your choices: 1. Allow claims to proceed as before (and allow banks to keep charging at current rates) 2. Carry on with the current situation (e.g claims on hold, bank can still charge) 3. Put a hold on all new charges (but continue to keep current claims on hold) 4. As 2. but with clearer provisions for special e.g hardship cases. Stakeholders reaction to this decision: 1. Both bank and consumers will play ball but the FSA will look a bit daft. Still its better to admit that you're wrong than to let the current situation continue. 2. Total loss of consumer confidence in FSA, FOS and OFT likely. Blowback will last years. Very difficult (and expensive) to rebuild reputation. Hovever banks will love the FSA and you will be invited to many more top tier events and dinners. A career enhancing move (or possibly not if Gordan finally decides he's had enough of sharp practice - not likely really but you never can tell these days). 3. Looks OK on paper - Hovever: Consumers with a claim will not be happy and banks share price will drop 20% overnight. You will make no friends and will never get that plush banking consultancy job when you leave the FSA in a couple of years. 4. At the very least you need to issue specific DIRECTIONS on this issue (not wishy washy guidence and 'Dear CEO letters, references to banking code etc..). However (as you will have already found) how do you define hardship? Much better to just make an accross the board decision. Which leads us to.......... So what do you do? Here is a solution that you might be able to swallow. PRESS RELEASE: Issue EMERGENCY DIRECTIONS. Saying that after careful review and reflection etc.....the current situation is unfair to customers blah blah blah........in the interests of helping them the FSA orders the following....... Immediately order all new charges to be no larger than £12 (ideally effective on OCT 1st but by 14th OCT at the latest. Any bank saying they cant implament changes within that timeframe is lying) and allow claims to proceed (e.g remove the wavier) for anything in excess of this amount. This would allow banks to keep the revenue rolling in, but at a reduced rate. It would also allow claims to continue (but at a reduced level of value as banks would seek to pay the difference charged between the old and new rates). The beauty of this option is that the OFT has already done the legwork. (see: The Office of Fair Trading: Current credit card default charges unfair ) Remember. This decision was originally meant to apply accross the board. "These principles also apply to default charges in other consumer contracts such as those for bank overdrafts, store cards and mortgages". Don't be tempted to keep the stay on claims. Its hardly fair that so many people have already claimed when others have been left hanging. Often it is those who most need the money who are currently stuck in the system. Set a deadline for claims to be finished (e.g similar to endowments but set the timelimit at 2 years). Allow banks to make offers to settle for the difference between £12 and whatever they have been charging. This is also a fit punishment for banks who have sought to profit from these types of charges. The banks that charged the most will pay the most back. You could also extend the time banks are allowed to take to process claims (suggest 12 weeks from receipt of claim to payout, not including DPA requests). IMPORTANT: You must allow banks to ofer a 'full and final settlement' for claims. Trust me jam today is better than jam tomorrow for most consumers. Most people currently stuck in a claim would take the difference between £12 and whatever they were being charged quite happily rather than wait 5 years" But wait I hear you say. The legality of bank charges is still in question. What if a court rules that the charges are fair? Well that is unlikely. And if a court does rule that they are fair then it will probably arrive at a figure of £4.50. Banks will welcome an FSA 'fair figure' of £12. All customers could be given a choice of accepting this settlement or waiting for the court case. That sounds like a fair choice to me. Give directions for banks to proceed with claims in line with the previous OFT ruling (see above). State that the ulimate legality of charges decided in court does not matter as you are instigating these measures in the interests of consumers (I know TCF does not strictly apply to bank accounts, but it probably should and it probably will one of these days, and if you say it does it will). You know that the banks have been breaking numerous aspects of TCF, FSA regs and BBA regs in relation to retail banking. Unfair Terms and Contracts is neither here nor there really. If you are looking for ammo to back up the decision then you already have it. This will fly with banks and consumers and will also restore consumer trust in the FSA (as an afterthough it might even help the FOS and the OFT). This is also what you should have done at the very beginning. Its the right decision. As a plus you'll even start getting those positive headlines that you love back again. Adopting the above suggestions would allow banks to put a £ figure on liability and would also put a cap on the time it will take to ultimately resolve. This is in the best interests of consumers, banks and the financial markets. It will also draw a line under the matter. In addition it will also allow the OFT to spend the next 5 years in various courts arguing the toss on Unfair Terms and Contracts. By the time they have finished and a decision has been reached the matter will be over. Whatever the ultimate decision the market will have moved on by then, and so will the claimants, and so will the defendants. Whatever the outcome it will no longer matter and everyone will have time to prepare. In addition what the UK retail economy could really use right now is an injection of liquidity. What better way than to use the banks to deliver it? If you want to keep balance sheets strong then people need to be able to pay their bills. This will allow them to do just that. Neither banks or consumers will be overjoyed with this decision but it might be one that everyone can live with. And it will be a hell of a lot better than the current fiasco. . Remember: Consumer confidence is everything. The FSA is widely regarded around the world as a 'model' regulator. Don't throw away this position over an issue that has a palatable solution for ALL stakeholders. You could also grow some balls. Remember - all you have to do is re-write the rulebook and/or issue directions. No one wants this dragged out for years. The FSA can and should be able to find a solution all by itself without the need to go running to the OFT or the courts. The market needs leadership and direction. The FSA has the mandate. But does it have the balls? We will have to wait until Sept 28 to find out. Yours, A Concerned Stakeholder P.S A NOTE TO THE CLEARING BANKS. It costs an average of £50-£150 to attract a new current account customer through traditional advertising. At no time in UK retail banking history have you managed to **** off so many people so quickly. OD charges were a nice cash cow while they lasted but you didn't think they were going to last forever, did you? At the first sign of trouble you should have dropped them. Yet the lure of easy cash was too easy. Some banks even designed special software to maximise revenue based on payment dates. It was very clever (for a while) and you wanted to maximise shareholder profit (as is your job). Hovever the landscape has changed hard and fast. If you want the IFA market, if the retail distribution review is going to mean anything, if you want to cross sell, upsell etc then you are going to have to change. An oppertunity exists RIGHT NOW for one UK clearing bank to break the mould and stop charging. Together with the right ad campaign you will literally have people begging to bank with you. Treat them right and they might never leave. In a country where people are more likely to get divorced than change bank accounts you would think this is an oppertunity not to be missed. Now you know you've all drawn up the plans and arranged the creatives. So who's going to go through the looking glass first? Cause someone's gotta be.

So what does everyone think that the FSA will do at the end of the month? There should be not doubt now that they have made a grave error in allowing claims to be put on hold until the outcome of the test case. Over the past 4 weeks they will have received more complaints than at any point in their history (whether or not they have logged them as complaint is another story) and more importantly they have suffered from a huge loss in consumer confidence. It is vital that consumers trust the regulator to do a good job. A regulator who effectively shuts down its own complaint handling procedures is obviously not an impartial regulator. So what will they do? Here are their choices (as far as I can tell) 1. Allow claims to proceed as before (and allow banks to keep charging at current rates) 2. Carry on with the current situation (e.g on hold) 3. Put a hold on all new charges (but continue to keep current claims on hold) 4. As 3. but with clearer provisions for special e.g hardship cases. One thing is for sure. If they pick option 2 then they are going to have a bigger fight on their hands than they realise. What do readers think? One option that might sit well with the banks and consumers would be to immediately order all new charges to be no larger than £12 and allow claims to proceed (e.g remove the wavier) for anything in excess of this amount. This would allow banks to keep the revenue rolling in but at a reduced rate. It would also allow claims to continue (but at a reduced level of value as banks would then seek to pay the difference charged between the old and new rates). Neither banks or consumers will be particularly happy with this decision but it might be one that everyone can live with. Update: I have put some of these thoughts in an open letter to the FSA in the campaign section here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/113025-open-letter-fsa.html I would be grateful for comments.

Jo - can I use a bit of your letter as well? I want to send it to a couple of reporters I know. Is that OK?

Jo and Penniless - that sounds great - just the thing we need - its gets straight to the heart of the matter as well - which is important for the reporters - bless them - send it off now!!!! definately not pants....

Oh - believe me - we are on it big time :-; but we still need as much pressure as possible to get that wavier lifted.

Thanks MacBoy - have just read my last post and my spelling is atrocious - very sorry. Heres the petition to 10 downing st to sign: Petition to: bring in new legislation to prevent the current abuse by banks and companys in relation to Penalty charges. and there is another one specifically to get rid of the FSA wavier: Make UK Banks Deal with Bank Charges - Online Petition Mabye a site admin could and put them in a visable sticky?

Hi Guys, I'm new on this forum - I run a bank charge reclaim company and a lot of our clients are wondering whats happening. Its great that everyone is keeping up the pressure. We have just sent a formal complaint to the FSA about the wavier as well. You can complain directly online here: About the FSA : Complaints about the FSA : Contacting us : Complaints form I would really like to know if any of you get a response. If we do I will certainly post it on this site. Remember the FSA only got 271 complaints as a whole last year. If we can beat this figure in a few weeks it will definalely hit the papers and there will be more pressure on them to look seriously at withdrawing the wavier in September. In the meantime thanks to everyone for posting the letter in defence of a stay for the court cases. If anyone has a case in cpurt they should definately use it. It costs the banks £80+ per hours for their lawyers to read this stuff so its all good. One of the conditions for the FSA continuing to keep the wavier in place is that people stop submitting and litigation the the County Courts. please keep the pressure on the courts because it could well get the wavier lifted for every case. Good Luck Everyone - Remember you are fighting the good fight - some of our clients cant afford to feed their kids and need this money.