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

[SELV]

Thanks jowalshy i will have a look tomorrow bit late now got to make the wife a cup of tea and a biscuit;) before we go to bed.

Also thank you tonycee for your info i'll do the same tomorrow you're a purrrrrfect gent:) .goodnight.

[Kinc]

The banks are admitting it's a service which falls under UTCCR reg's even though they have made it quite clear in the past it's a 'breach of contract' to the customers.

 

They are saying though because these services are packaged all nicely together for every man woman and child they don't apply. They say it's because people have a choice on how they use the package. (Dear Bank, did you let me know about all these other packages that exsisted at the time of opening the account or at anytime to the point of me writing you a letter?)

 

Mis-Selling.

[african_igbo]

Thanks for the heads up I have tried goooogle but lacking in update information on whats what.

[hilaryfrances]

thanks for this info guys

[jowalshy]

BBC NEWS | Business | Banks' 'self-serving propaganda'

[Gez]

Hallelujah! Now they are addressing the important bit. Now what I'd like to see examined is a simple "yes or no" Do these "services" generate a profit?

 

If yes, then does this confirm that thousands of written defences for cases currently in the system, that claim that the charges are to cover admin costs are untruthful? If not, why not?

 

How do these "services", in terms of cause & action, differ from the old system of "to cover admin costs". This comparison should be made imo because whilst there are active cases still being defended with the "to cover our costs" argument, they are entirely relevant to this case..

[mel3uk]

is there anywhere we can go (on the web) where we can get an update of whats happening on this test case?

[Gez]

Er.. yes. Try this site http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

[mel3uk]

ha ha i know this site but there doesn't seem to be much else info elsewhere.

[Bookworm]

Penalty Charges has someone posting an update more or less daily, and MSE also sent someone (but not sure if it was every day or not, I think maybe not). Both of these are by members of the public, not legal people or trained to report objectively, so whatever you read will be a personal view of the reporter, with all it entails in the way of bias, but you can still get a view that way.

[SELV]

Hi Mr Moderator/Bookworm, now that avatar looks really like a Bookworm ,instead of a snooker player;) (hope you have a sense of humour life is too short hey?) Anyway thanks for the info on your last post shall be onto it as soon as have finished this post ,cheers matey..

[freakyleaky]

Hi Selv. Just thought I would let you know that "Mr Moderator/Bookworm" is actually a lady!

[SELV]

Cheers freakyleaky, having only been a member on the site for only a few weeks there was nothing in any of the posts I have read to assume the Bookworm was female so I appologise to Miss or Mrs Bookworm for my apparent error.Incidentally I know plenty of women that play snooker with or without glasses;)

[Bookworm]

I'm not one of them.

[SELV]

Nice one Bookworm now I see you in a completely different way ,so in future I will be more carefull what I say about you:o .Incidentally have you ever played?

[Bookworm]

Nope. I used to play a mean game of pools in my youth though. ;-)

[SELV]

To be honest Bookworm with the ammount of posts you do on this forum you probably do not have time to cook?

[Bookworm]

You'd be wrong, as we speak, I have half a wild salmon with coconut milk, lime juice, pepper, chilli pepper, ginger, garlic, tomatoes in the oven, should be ready in about 10 mns. First time I am trying the recipe.

 

(Now we're REALLY off the OFT case topic! )

[SELV]

I will be around in 9mins I love Salmon.(guessed you had a sense of humour)XX

[BankFodder]

The test case arguments are drawing to a close and the hearing is likely to be over by Friday. No sitting on Thursday.

 

Today, Counsel for Barclays in particular raised with the judge the issue of stayed cases. It was pointed out that many of the stays which had been granted were due to expire at the end of the test case hearing - which is likely to be on Friday.

 

Unsurprisingly the banks were concerned that the stays would automatically be lifted. The judge took this on board but instead of making an order, he commented upon the need to be even-handed about the matter and said that he would reflect on the issue and decide what recommendation he might make to the County Court judiciary.

[Gez]

Im still quite frustrated that the "to cover our costs" defence is not being examined. I'm sure there are thousands of cases in the system that have been stayed where this was still the written defence. If they were stayed because of the test case, then they are relevant & should have been examined imo.

[hilaryfrances]

come everypeeps lets wish the OFT good luck, I hope that "bullying big brother" gets a slap just where it hurts. Banks and other financial institutions are uncaring,profit chasing, bas****s who dont care who they hurt or stand on just to squeeze a bit more profit from the masses.

 

ooops get down from soapbox and hides in corner:o

[patrickq1]

to cover our costs

this is already in their seperate investigations hence no need at this time to bring up this subject / i think

patrickq1

[Gez]

Yes, it could be part of their further investigation if they were given power to make the ruling, but I believe that this method of defence should have been looked at in this test case. It would have shown the judge and the world just how blatant bankers have been in trying to dodge the law..

[ohoh4312]

BBC NEWS | Business | Bank charge cases 'need freezing'

 

Yesterdays report - so much for the possibility of stays being lifted