H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***

[yourbank]

Bookie - Indeed !

 

Kennyh - I don't know, they are due in by the 28th.

[srfrench]

Cheers YB..much appreciated, sent now.

 

CARO...your inbox is full

[fergal71]

I used govan law templates and natwest have responded with a 3 page letter... denying all issues and stating that case is closed and this is final response...

[yourbank]

I used govan law templates and natwest have responded with a 3 page letter... denying all issues and stating that case is closed and this is final response...

 

That's strange cos someone else on MSE got one that stated something about financial hardship. They then phoned them and were then told that omitting the word challenge meant that they had not looked at the letter as a bank charges challenge one. Interesting responses I guess.

Link to MSE response: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=29205433&postcount=1

[fergal71]

If they are rejecting CCA and sec5 utccr then what next.... I feel this challenge is fading... I remember the day od suporeme court judgement and there was real anger....

 

I feel unless something happens soon we need to take a more public action...

march on downing street or something as this is beyond a joke.... they can do what ever they want... people are even coming out fighting against obamas ideas.... this is quickly becoming a joke... the law is being interpreted by regulators and judges to suit the banks... we bail them out , they continue with bonuses, everyone forgets mps expenses.... PLEASE CAN CAG COME UP WITH SOMETHING WE CAN ALL SUPPORT FRONT PAGE BANNER AND LETS GO FOR THEM.... TAKE A LEAF OUT THE BOOK OF THE FRENCH !!

[srfrench]

Fergal.....calm down bud ... the FOS may be rejecting the arguments of CCa and UTCCR but theyt are not the LAW. Only a Court can decide on these things.

 

Whilst the FOS can rule on disputes, the Banks in these cases don't have to follow them or uphold the FOS's decision...did you know that?

 

Only a Court of Law can enforce or correct an opinion, and that's all these regulatory bodies can do, give opinions.

[yourbank]

It's the banks that are rejecting them and a further note to mention is that the Govan law Centre templates ARE UK WIDE and not just for Scotland as they have clarified on their blog so game on for banks and FOS claims.

Govan Law Centre: Unfair bank charges: free help to amend existing complaint letters

[srfrench]

Indeed....can't say if anyone's surprised that the Banks' are rejecting them given their thinly failed mis-leading letters saying to their consumers there's nothing you can do. It just goes to show that if they blatantly brushing aside valid legal arguments then they are scared of something or are so convinced of their invincibility it's frightening.

[yourbank]

At the moment, the banks are sending out rejection letters for all claims on their books(even some where they have paid out in full and settled the cases). However, there are things ongoing across all the forums so I would expect there to be some news before they get to the end of their long list

[srfrench]

Hmmmm...interestingly, I haven't heard of any Abbey Claimants getting any letters from Abbey? Has anyone or is this the only Bank that's keeping it's head down?

[yourbank]

Abbey ones are showing a date of December 2009 and are being sent out. Having clarified with them, their letters are 8 weeks from 31st December 2009.

[srfrench]

Are these in response to complaints or actual claims lodged with the Courts?

[yourbank]

I'm not aware of any cases where Abbey have applied for a strike out for court claims.

[rdm2006]

At the moment, the banks are sending out rejection letters for all claims on their books(even some where they have paid out in full and settled the cases). However, there are things ongoing across all the forums so I would expect there to be some news before they get to the end of their long list

 

Quite right YB i had one from RBS who paid out 10 months ago lol

 

But at least it made me smile lol

[TheyrCriminals]

Hi Guys,

 

How can MSE state that the recent Supreme Court ruling in the bank charges test case doesn't impact on reclaiming credit card charges. It is precisely the same laws that are used for reclaiming credit card charges that is used for reclaiming bank charges, what's the difference?

 

TheyrCriminals

[caro]

Strewth....well nothing for it, I'm having to to pay for an application to unstay my claim otherwise it will be struck out on the 1st Feb 2010.

 

As such to save me from having to fork out 2 x £75 fees in raising applications I will be submitting my amended POC at the same time.

 

Just got very very tired and frustrated at having to wait, then wait, then wait some more with any assistance in submitting a new/amended POC.

 

I have formulated a new POC, just need it checking.

 

Can anyone assist as I will be in the Courts to submit the new POC before Friday. Help anyone?

 

Not saying this is what you should do, but can you ask for the stay to be extended owing to the lack of clarity in the SC judgement?

 

Cheers YB..much appreciated, sent now.

 

CARO...your inbox is full

 

I'm PMing you an email addy you can use.

 

If they are rejecting CCA and sec5 utccr then what next.... I feel this challenge is fading... I remember the day od suporeme court judgement and there was real anger....

 

I feel unless something happens soon we need to take a more public action...

march on downing street or something as this is beyond a joke.... they can do what ever they want... people are even coming out fighting against obamas ideas.... this is quickly becoming a joke... the law is being interpreted by regulators and judges to suit the banks... we bail them out , they continue with bonuses, everyone forgets mps expenses.... PLEASE CAN CAG COME UP WITH SOMETHING WE CAN ALL SUPPORT FRONT PAGE BANNER AND LETS GO FOR THEM.... TAKE A LEAF OUT THE BOOK OF THE FRENCH !!

 

As part of CAG, perhaps you'd like to follow the link to a thread that's running in the campaign forum and join in a discussion what would be most effective.

 

Unfortunately not everyone is willing or able to travel to London because the banks have got their money.

[Bookworm]

Well of course the banks are rejecting anything asking them to pay out as non-valid and what not... what did anyone expect, that they would roll over and pay up? They didn't before, they sure as hell are not going to do so now... As before, they will rely on the vast majority of people to give up at the first hurdle.

 

Come on, how many of us have in their files a variation on: "we are satisfied that our charges are fair and lawful"? Hell, even when they paid up, they still maintained that!

[EricTheRed]

Re Edinburgh - you're right on James Fountain Court - People - James Duffy - I just get worried with these fountain court people - still not a local solicitor though but yes better than it being a QC.

 

The claimant was ordered to expand on his POCs and Mr Duffy wasn't given the opportunity to put his case forward.

 

Interestingly enough Giles Wheeler works at the same chambers as James Duffy – not that I think there is any collusion but I haven’t been called the world’s greatest conspiracy theorist for nothing.

[Bookworm]

I haven’t been called the world’s greatest conspiracy theorist for nothing.

Ah, but who called you that, and why? Hmmm? ;-)

[EricTheRed]

Re Edinburgh - you're right on James Fountain Court - People - James Duffy - I just get worried with these fountain court people - still not a local solicitor though but yes better than it being a QC.

 

The claimant was ordered to expand on his POCs and Mr Duffy wasn't given the opportunity to put his case forward.

 

I understand that James Duffy launched into the SCOJ ruling and was stopped in his tracks by the judge. Was any decision reached at court? It was on the LB site but has been moved.

[EricTheRed]

Ah, but who called you that, and why? Hmmm? ;-)

 

JFK, George W Bush and the editor of the Sunday Sport!!!!!!!!!

[yourbank]

It's back up there now. no further news though as yet.

 

Hi

Just returned from court. the bank has appointed a Q.C! As soon as he walked in, one of the other solicitors made a joke about him being in the wrong court and the jury trials were next door.........lol

 

Anyway, the bank requested time to examine the content of the incidental application, so the sheriff has requested that by 28 January, I submit a fuller arguement. The bank has then been given a further 2 weeks to state a defence. I will then have time to rebutt before a full days hearing is convened on 5 March to hear legal argument.

 

The QC for the bank began to outline his argument before being stopped by the sheriif. Eassentially, their argument is that the ruling of the supreme court covers the whole issue of unfair bank charges

 

kind regards

[EricTheRed]

It's back up there now. no further news though as yet.

 

 

Excellent. Looks as though the barrister was not prepared and the judge saw through it.

[Bookworm]

their argument is that the ruling of the supreme court covers the whole issue of unfair bank charges

Oh how they wish it were so...

[yourbank]

The YB claimant who was in court this afternoon defending a strike out attempt by yorkshire bank got 6 weeks to amend POC's.