OFT test case

[ginan]

At least the BBC are the only news organisation giving anything like regular updates on the case although they only cover selected topics.

 

One of the most significant aspects of the hearing which they didn't report on is the increasing relevence it has to current count court stays and the waiver and the judgement and subsequent reccomendation the judge will make to the county courts regardless of an appeal being made by the banks.

 

As from yesterday the FSA became a party in the case.

[ginan]

From what I gather, after all the posturing from other sites they'd be there reporting every moment, they got bored after a couple of days and decided it wasn't worth the time and money after all, getting the point somehow later than you guys did.

 

 

Interesting.

 

Any chance of an update on this Crazy?

[traceyrmj]

and also the total lack of news in the papers about it - or am i reading the wrong papers!

[JOSH_IOU]

Tracey i thought it was just the guys tha read page 3.

[JOSH_IOU]

Lloyd's TSB's Defence is interesting to say the least.

 

How many of you actually signed an application form and not a contract?

[dave]

At this point, Mr Brian Doctor QC, acting for the OFT, read out a clause from an explanatory leaflet published by Nationwide.

This said precisely the opposite - that customers who went overdrawn were indeed in breach of their contracts.

Mr Vos admitted this was a "googly" and one of the OFT's "best forensic points".

But he dismissed the issue by saying that the leaflet Mr Doctor quoted was simply wrong.

 

 

Wow. It's pointed out that your contract IS what it says it is, in your OWN words, yet in court you can just say, "oh that? We're just wrong to have printed it."

 

 

So knowingly lying to customers? Not a great argument in court is it?

[JOSH_IOU]

There not just lying in court to the customers.

 

There lying under oath and thats a high crime.

[JOSH_IOU]

Perverting the course of justice.

 

This common law offence is committed where a person or persons:-

 

(a) acts or embarks upon a course of conduct

(b) which has a tendency to, and

© is intended to pervert,

(d) the course of public justice.

 

Listed below are some of the ways where conduct is capable of amounting to an offence:-

 

(a) Making false allegations;

(b) Perjury;

© Concealing offences;

(d) Obstructing the police ;

(e) Assisting others to evade arrest;

(f) Failing to prosecute;

(g) Procuring and indemnifying sureties;

(h) Interference with witnesses, evidence and jurors;

(i) Publication of matters calculated to prejudice a fair trial.

 

I can pick at least 2 out of there that the banks fall under.

 

Which probably means you can pick out more than 4.

 

Straight forward logical deduction.

[JOSH_IOU]

This comes back to Special Constable training i remember falling of asleep through most of this.

 

 

This common law offence is committed where a person or persons:-

(a) acts or embarks upon a course of conduct

(b) which has a tendency to, and

© is intended to pervert,

(d) the course of public justice.

 

Listed below are some of the ways where conduct is capable of amounting to an offence:-

 

(a) Making false allegations;

(b) Perjury;

© Concealing offences;

(d) Obstructing the police ;

(e) Assisting others to evade arrest;

(f) Failing to prosecute;

(g) Procuring and indemnifying sureties;

(h) Interference with witnesses, evidence and jurors;

(i) Publication of matters calculated to prejudice a fair trial.

 

Some Cases

 

A positive act is required. In R v Headley, it was held that failing to respond to a summons was insufficient to warrant a charge of perverting the course of justice.

 

Any act or course of conduct which tends or is intended to interfere with the course of public justice can amount to an offence. In order to get a conviction, it is not sufficient to prove that the conduct actually did, or had a tendency to pervert the course of justice. The evidence must prove that the offender INTENDED that it would do so (R v Lalani 1999).

 

In R v Clark 2003, a motorist had failed to stop at the scene of a fatal road accident. He had probably had as much as 9 or 10 pints of lager. When he reported the matter to the police the next day, it was too late to obtain a positive breath test from him. However, the court stated that going home and not reporting the accident as soon as practicable was insufficient to justify such a charge on the basis that he was 'concealing evidence'. There had to be more. The conviction was quashed.

 

It is not necessary for the offender's motives to be the procurement of a false verdict or the defeat of the ends of justice. Trying to introduce genuine evidence by unlawful means is perverting the course of justice (e.g. A witness takes incriminating photos but refuses to give evidence. Steps are taken by the investigator to get another witness to introduce them as evidence). Attorney-General's Reference (1 of 2002).

 

This offence is sometimes referred to as 'attempting to pervert the course of justice', but the word "attempting" was misleading (R v K J Williams (1991) 92 CrAppR 158). A better expression would be "endeavouring to pervert the course of justice". It is therefore not necessary to charge a person with attempt to commit this offence under the Criminal Attempts Act 1981.

 

Use of this offence in relatively minor instances

 

There has been comment by the courts where this offence has been used for relatively minor attempts to pervert the course of justice and it is charged alongside a offence which is serious enough to permit the offenders conduct to be taken into account when sentencing for the main offence. For example, in R v Sookoo 2002, a shoplifter gave a false name to the police which was initially accepted by them. He was then charged and bailed. He was re-arrested several weeks later and put before a court charged with both the theft and the above offence. The Court of Appeal said (the below is slightly modified to help summarise the point):

 

'Where, as here, an offender had attempted to hide his identity and inevitably failed, the prosecutors should not include a specific count of perverting the course of justice. Such conduct may serve to aggravate the original offence and the judge may well think it right to increase the sentence by an appropriate length.

 

There are such cases which must include serious aggravating features in an attempt to pervert the course of justice. There will be cases where a great deal of police time and resources are involved in putting the matter right, or there may be cases where innocent members of the public have their names given and they have been the subject of questioning and even detention.'

 

That is not the situation in this case. This was an unsophisticated attempt which was doomed to failure. His true identity soon was discovered.

 

Much the same was said in the contemporaneous case of R v Cotter, Clair and Wynn 2002.

 

 

 

MODE OF TRIAL AND PENALTY INDICTMENT Imprisonment

 

POWERS OF ARREST arrestable offence

[Son of Shoestring]

I hesitate to post this link because it is somewhat off topic. It IS about debt, though. Besides, I think anyone other than those who interest falls entirely in the contents of their own wallet would greatly benefit from a wider understanding of the real reason for debt.

 

Take the time to listen and learn:

 

Guns and Butter for Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008

 

I loved the opening remarks about the discovery by bankers a few years ago that the "poor were honest" and wanted to "repay their debt" followed by "how dumb can you be..."

 

Apologies to those who consider it way off topic - in which case don't listen.

[Gez]

I wonder, will the judge be asking the banks.. "..and how long have these services been a part of your core terms?"

I'd love to see the reaction when 7/8 defendants say "Since September your honor"

 

Immediately after the test case was announced? What an astonishingly freak co-incidence!

[JOSH_IOU]

bom bom bommmmmm da bom

[Gez]

One other thing. If, as banks now claim, the services & fees are part of the price for the package of services for the account as a whole, then isn't it mis-selling to say that it is free banking?

 

Doesn't that make this false advertising?

Bank Account: internet banking, easy access: HSBC Bank UK

[JOSH_IOU]

I am going To ring the ASA.

 

My defence says's that the charges are used to pay for ATM's.

 

And yet There is no charge displayed on the ATM.

[JOSH_IOU]

Read Lloyd's TSB section 17.3

 

There saying they don't make unauthorised overdraft charges.

Or am I misreading?

[JOSH_IOU]

17.4

 

This is Wrong.

 

The payment is not declined the payment is processed and then returned.

[Castlebest]

I wonder if the banks will submit new defence documents on all of the stayed cases because what they are arguing now isnt what it says on a good number of the County Court claim documents they have submitted.

[JOSH_IOU]

Idoubt it

 

Do you mean on current claims?

[mailmannz]

Yeah, still doesnt hold water as the end result is as a direct consequence of something YOU have done. Your arguement is that the banks shouldnt let you, which of course they could fix in 30 seconds...but we all know there is no money in that!

 

Mailman

[mailmannz]

mailmannz wrote:

 

Well there you go, you have just shot your own argument down.

 

Haha...sorry but I havent

 

Everyone knows banks could make this problem go away in 30 seconds...but they arent.

 

The reality of this is also you are your own master of your destiny, if you are drawing on money you dont have then, in all honesty, you only have yourself to blame.

 

As I said early, just because your cat lets you kick it doesnt make kicking your cat right.

 

Be a man, take responsibility for your actions and stop blaming others.

 

Mailman

[JOSH_IOU]

Yeah, still doesnt hold water as the end result is as a direct consequence of something YOU have done. Your arguement is that the banks shouldnt let you, which of course they could fix in 30 seconds...but we all know there is no money in that!

 

Mailman

 

pmsl well I guess you haven't claimed yet.

[ginan]

Maybe It’s just me but I find it very odd that the main thread for the test case has been relegated to a difficult-to-find sub forum in ‘Campaign’.

 

The test case is arguably the single most import event in the history of bank charges - the reason for this site’s existence - and it’s given very little prominence , in stark contrast to other sites.

 

One can only guess as to why.

[car2403]

Maybe It’s just me but I find it very odd that the main thread for the test case has been relegated to a difficult-to-find sub forum in ‘Campaign’.

 

The test case is arguably the single most import event in the history of bank charges - the reason for this site’s existence - and it’s given very little prominence , in stark contrast to other sites.

 

One can only guess as to why.

 

It could be because it's gone so far off the subject that it's no longer relevant.

[Gez]

Hmm we're off topic here now, but I do agree somewhat. The trouble is, this place is absolutely huge so finding the right place to put everything is always going to be a tough job.

If you go to the campaign section though, it sits right at the top so that certainly seems the right place for it.

[darling1]

The reality of this is also you are your own master of your destiny, if you are drawing on money you dont have then, in all honesty, you only have yourself to blame.

Be a man, take responsibility for your actions and stop blaming others.

Mailman

I thought that the main point was the fact that banks are charging an enormous amount for this so called service and then charging when you cannot afford the charges that they have imposed!

This is not just about the fact that some people are unfortunate enough to get into difficulties, and if we were all fortunate enough to be masters of our own destinies most of us would choose not to use banks AT ALL.... we do not choose to do so - we are payed that way - peolpe have benefits payed into banks - we are made to have DD's or pay more for services - you have to have a good credit score to buy a house etc etc... There are a lot of people I know who say they have never had any charges - then when they look have had some - they were just not so desparate that it really affected their lives - but families and lots of young people are desparately affected.