This topic was closed on 03/06/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

This topic was closed on 03/05/19. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

Any person faced with a decision to allocate the case to the multi-track by a DJ, should appeal it. It is laughable that DJ's are allocating these cases to anything other than the small-claims track where the value is = to or There are no complex issues of law etc. A DJ who cannot deal with simple contract law, should stop sitting as a judge.

i think at the mo, most banks don't care... if this becomes widespread, expect some lobbying of government .... and possibly, very remote possibility, a change in domestic law

Parliament repealed the unfair terms law insofar as it is applicable to banks both at common law and otherwise . . . ? Now that's a thought isn't it?

I am not sure it is. If Bank X states "If you wish to redeem this mortgage within the first X years, then you shall pay £Y to us" where Y does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of their loss, then they are not IMO entitled to it!

what's the consensus here?