The OFT Case

[determindator]

Hi Bookie,

 

What are the new charges called, do we have any suggestions as they seem to have a problem as to what to call them!

[The Phantom]

Hi Bookie,

 

What are the new charges called, do we have any suggestions as they seem to have a problem as to what to call them!

 

Isn't it a fee for a service ?

[Bookworm]

Nope, the judge was quite clear on that.

 

What do we call them? errrrr, good question... Charges?

[HSBCrusher]

its all very hush hush isn't it...

[The Phantom]

Nope, the judge was quite clear on that.

 

What do we call them? errrrr, good question... Charges?

 

hmm.....pass then

[rrfcfan]

Has anyone read this

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Early overdraft victory for banks

 

Not good news, well just for now anyway.

[african_igbo]

BBC NEWS | Business | Early overdraft victory for banks ummh not good hey!. So whats gives with a hearing on the 28th October then.

[ratlover]

Hi,

 

Just found this thread after applying for repayment of charges with Barclays recently. I had sent them my "letter before action" on 16-10-08, but on reading the following on the BBC news website I wonder if it's worth even continuing with my claim.

 

[b]Latest hearing[/b]

The judge's latest ruling focused on whether historic bank terms were unfair penalties under common law, and if customers who had been charged for going overdrawn could challenge them. 

He decided that customers could not challenge Barclays, Clydesdale, HSBC and the majority of Abbey's terms. A Barclays spokesman said they were "pleased" with the decision.

 

If apply to the courts with my claim then am I just going to waste a court fee for which I cannot afford to lose.

 

ratlover

[The Phantom]

I think this was just to see if the charges are penalties under common law, the UTCC point is still ongoing and if you have downloaded the POC from this website it should include both points in your argument.

We now know the judge doesn't consider the fees penalties under common law, but w may still be OK with the second argument, that is why the case between the banks and OFT is ongoing as well

[texel]

If you live in Scotland you stand a better chance of going ahead. But South of the Border it might be difficult. Don't forget to use the hardship case wherever you live.

[african_igbo]

Hey is there still a judgment for 28th of this month.

[Bigmac versus]

Well the banks are to appeal the decision that the charges are subject to fairness on both the current and historical terms, it is expected to last one week. The question is will the banks accept the decision if it stays.................id say unlikely.

[rory32]

Extremely unlikely

[Bigmac versus]

We all live in hope Rory then again it could go to the house of lords, mmm................... that will be interesting what with all the bail outs the banks are getting should it be there at all.

 

Whats more than likely is that were still in limbo come the new year.

[RGS1]

heres the latest news

BBC NEWS | Business | Banks in overdraft charges appeal

[adamc6671]

Thanks for that RGS. I've just read through the item, and as far as I can tell from that, todays hearing is little more than a small step along the road that leads to a (probably very long) sequence of appeals, either by the banks or by the OFT, depending which way the decision on the application of the UTCCRs goes.

 

Still - heres hoping!

 

Adam.

[brown1950]

Mr Justice Waller said in the Court of Appeal today :-

 

'' They (overdraft charges) are almost bound to be unfair because Peter is paying Paul ''

[mailmannz]

Well, the chap repersenting RBS Group disagreed, of course

 

Mailman

[african_igbo]

Any updates if memory serves me well there was something in the Courts happening today.. If so please concur..

[african_igbo]

Please pretty please may us plebes get justice...please.

[Bookworm]

"The charges make up a significant part of the banks' remuneration for providing a bank account," he argued, in relation to both future charges and past charges.

Well, bang goes the illusion of free banking then, ladies and gentlemen, as stated by the bank's own lawyer...

[egbb]

We all pay for banking in one form or another through pathetic interest rates on savings, extorionate interest rates on overdrafts, mortgages (banks not reducing rates in line with BOE rate cuts), loans etc.

 

I have no objection to paying them for a banking service which they provide, but they can start by giving me back the £0000's they owe me in unfair charges. After I've go those back, I'm going after them for the interest paid on the loan they made me take out to pay off the charges (at Base rate + 10%).

 

It's looking promising

[JonCris]

Well, bang goes the illusion of free banking then, ladies and gentlemen, as stated by the bank's own lawyer...

 

So what they are saying is that it's essential that customers default as without it they won't be able to offer 'free' banking ........... bit of a conflict there don't you think.

 

They design a system which makes it very easy for customers to default rather than a system that makes it unlikely........... go figure

[Bigmac versus]

Quite correct JonCris which means that people who are charged pay for the free banking of the more fortunate people in our society.

 

Its always the case that the most vulnerable people in society pay more for the same service. Pre-payment meters come to mind here along with the higher interest rates for anything take on HP.

[photoman]

"Laurence Rabinowitz QC, for RBS NatWest, said some of Mr Justice Smith's reasoning was "not justified" and "schizophrenic". "

 

 

Do they really think that by making such comments about fellow judges that they are going to win over and positively influence the presiding judges ?

 

.... I also think Mr Justice Smith now has a good case (on court record too) for bringing formal actions for libel !!