OFT test case

[JOSH_IOU]

[JOSH_IOU]

they called the bank rotten turkeys?

[ohoh4312]

Hi all

 

I just read on the BBC that each defendant is expected to take two days to present their arguments, meaning that the 8 days originally predicted for the case has gone well out of the window.

 

I suppose this will then have an impact on when Judgement is handed down?

 

More tactics?? Or reasoned, balanced arguments?? Pah!

[dave]

and how would we argue Full and Final? lol ...like your thinking though

 

In the letters I received from ALL the banks where I got my money back, it stated "Full and final settlement".

 

Is that what you meant?

[Bookworm]

I think Bankfodder has argued throughout that F&F is not actually binding in these cases, but I would have to go and find out where he said that and why. Something to do with consideration, if memory serves, but don't quote me on that.

 

Edit: I see Zoot's in the thread, Zoot, can you confirm? (or not, as the case may be? )

[dave]

Well, good luck to the banks getting the money back!!!

 

Talk about turning the tables - if they win and want it back, they are in the same position as us - we have it before they do, so perhaps I'll take it before they have a chance to get to it!

[JOSH_IOU]

What Gez is saying is if the banks prove the "fees" for their "services" are legal it will set a precedent in law and everyone will be able to do the same.

 

So all sorts of services will start appearing on your direct debit statements and because they are direct debits you wont have any choice, the money will be gone from your bank account.

 

pete

 

That's a huge if

[photoman]

Just made a post on another thread that some of you may find interesting?

 

It concerns the issue of third party companies buying debts from lenders, and how they should be aware of the fact that some of the debt could consist in part of charges that the debtor may challenge and recover.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1334087.html

[JOSH_IOU]

The more info you give these people the more they worm out of the tin.

 

If you think a banks tin could only hold 30 coins think again. They will replace the tin. Democracy only works when its being attacked.

[andrew1]

Just made a post on another thread that some of you may find interesting?

 

It concerns the issue of third party companies buying debts from lenders, and how they should be aware of the fact that some of the debt could consist in part of charges that the debtor may challenge and recover.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1334087.html

 

This will definitely frustrate the massive Debt Purchase marketplace if the OC and the DCA have to analyse each and every account and outline what might be charges/paid charges/unpaid charges. That's brilliant and will take the shine off the ease at which they can make a fortune.

[Gez]

That's a huge if

 

Indeed it is a huge if.. Which is why the "service fees" buls**t simply must be condemned & outlawed by both the OFT & the courts. If it is not, then penalty charges are effectively perfectly legal as long as you call them service fees.

It will give the green light to any company to introduce new services for which fees are applied. They won't have to ask you if you want these services, they can just apply them to your account and start charging you for them.

 

This would cause economic chaos..

[Faustus]

Times Today High-street banks defend ‘rip-off’ overdraft charges as court battle commences - Times Online

 

"The comment was unfortunate because it was made before the OFT had even begun its continuing investigation into current account overdraft charges. It became obvious that, “a hornet’s nest having been stirred”, the matter should go to court for a decision on the issues, said Mr Rabinowitz.

 

He argued that the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations, introduced in 1999, do not apply to overdraft charges because they do not constitute payment for a service. "

 

I'm sorry, I appear to be suffering a brain failure. What do most Banks' T&C call these fees now?

[Docman]

NO, not brain failure. Mr Rabinowitz, as the lead QC for RBS, has made what is called a 'Freudian slip. He meant to say 'fees' but his brain kept telling him to say 'charges' because that is what he truly believes they are. I just hope the OFT's QC points it out to the judge.

As regards the rest of his argument, if the best the banks can offer in their leading statement is bleat about the OFT putting the spotlight about their little [problem], then they should give up now.

[photoman]

"The future of free banking in Britain may rest on a High Court judge’s decision on whether charges imposed on account holders for unauthorised overdrafts are legal."

 

"If the OFT wins, some banking experts forecast the end of free current accounts as banks attempt to recoup their losses."

 

 

I'm really sick of all this insidious scaremongering and the underhand threats being circulated around by the Banks.

It is an obvious attempt to garner sympathy from customers who have never had to suffer the spiralling misery caused by these charges, by threatening to charge for other services.

Banks should just stop being so greedy, and accept that the interest paid upon borrowing is more than adequate.

 

To look at it another way, it is also an admission by the banks that they do actually make profits from these charges...... yet in such circumstances many banks presented them as merely being "to recoup costs incurred"

[Paintball]

Huis-clos, anyone?

 

Plus ça change ...

[JonCris]

More misleading guff being spouted by the banks agents.

 

As I recall the campaign for the recovery of bank penalty fees began long before the OFT involvement or their declaration (unhelpful as it turned out) on Credit Card fees.

[Alphageek]

NO, not brain failure. Mr Rabinowitz, as the lead QC for RBS, has made what is called a 'Freudian slip. He meant to say 'fees' but his brain kept telling him to say 'charges' because that is what he truly believes they are.

 

That made me laugh!

[JonCris]

"The future of free banking in Britain may rest on a High Court judge’s decision on whether charges imposed on account holders for unauthorised overdrafts are legal."

 

"If the OFT wins, some banking experts forecast the end of free current accounts as banks attempt to recoup their losses."

 

 

I'm really sick of all this insidious scaremongering and the underhand threats being circulated around by the Banks.

It is an obvious attempt to garner sympathy from customers who have never had to suffer the spiralling misery caused by these charges, by threatening to charge for other services.

Banks should just stop being so greedy, and accept that the interest paid upon borrowing is more than adequate.

 

To look at it another way, it is also an admission by the banks that they do actually make profits from these charges...... yet in such circumstances many banks presented them as merely being "to recoup costs incurred"

 

 

What has become of a society that forces the poor to pay for the benefits of those much better off who could pay for their banking without going broke

[Sparklez30]

i'm confused I thought the banks were arguing that the fees were for a service? Now they are saying their exempt because the charges are not for a service?

 

Is that not the reason the charges are a penalty and therefore unlawful or am I completely lost in this whole thing (which I expect I am)

[Alphageek]

Times Today High-street banks defend ‘rip-off’ overdraft charges as court battle commences - Times Online

 

"It could also lead to disappointment for about 50,000 consumers whose claims have been put on ice. Until now, banks have been routinely returning the full amount of a claim back to customers.

 

If the banks lose in the High Court, they may only have to refund the difference between the charges they imposed and a new acceptable rate of penalties set by the regulator."

What happened to 'if any part of a penalty is unlawful then it all should be repaid'?

[Alphageek]

i'm confused I thought the banks were arguing that the fees were for a service? Now they are saying their exempt because the charges are not for a service?

 

Is that not the reason the charges are a penalty and therefore unlawful or am I completely lost in this whole thing (which I expect I am)

 

It beats me as well. :-?

 

It is nice, however, to hear the Bank's QCs are as much in a muddle as their collections departments and DCAs always seem to be.

[JonCris]

Even if successful whatever the OFT deem is 'reasonable' unless it is a true reflection of the banks costs will be meaningless as it is with credit card charges & still subject to challenge by the consumer

 

The court is being asked to determine whether or not the OFT has the power to regulate in respect of their fees under the Unfair Contract Terms legislation - NOT at common law

[mailmannz]

If the OFT wins, some banking experts forecast the end of free current accounts as banks attempt to recoup their losses.

 

Correct me if im but can someone please explain to me how one can lose money they never should have had in the first place?

 

Mailman

[car2403]

If the OFT wins, some banking experts forecast the end of free current accounts as banks attempt to recoup their losses.

 

Correct me if im but can someone please explain to me how one can lose money they never should have had in the first place?

 

Mailman

 

Read it as;

 

If the OFT wins, some banking experts forecast the end of free current accounts as banks attempt to recoup their forecasted profit losses.

[smutley]

BBC NEWS | Business | Bank charges stir 'hornets' nest'