Future precidence on account charges

[SPARKY100]

Going forward from making a successful claim against any of these modern day highway robbers, what precidence does it set for any applied charges in the future? Are they entitled to continue to levy the same extortion upon us, or is there a foundation for true cost recovery charges only? I'd be interested to hear any views on this. Thanks

[SPARKY100]

Going forward from making a successful claim against any of these modern day highway robbers, what precidence does it set for any applied charges in the future? Are they entitled to continue to levy the same extortion upon us, or is there a foundation for true cost recovery charges only? I'd be interested to hear any views on this. Thanks

[BankFodder]

We have answered exactly this question today and once previously.

No precedents in the County Court. However it could be used as a persuasive example.

 

The banks will contiue as they always have done.

[BankFodder]

We have answered exactly this question today and once previously.

No precedents in the County Court. However it could be used as a persuasive example.

 

The banks will contiue as they always have done.

[SPARKY100]

Let's hope enough of us rise up and raise the awareness, and the banks are forced through humiliation to present true cost charges in future.

 

I think we could be waiting some time!!

 

Thanks for the reply

[SPARKY100]

Let's hope enough of us rise up and raise the awareness, and the banks are forced through humiliation to present true cost charges in future.

 

I think we could be waiting some time!!

 

Thanks for the reply

[SPARKY100]

I'm enjoying the optimism.

[SPARKY100]

I'm enjoying the optimism.

[mas101]

I am enjoying the optimism also. Bank charges are without a doubt a penalty when set at their current levels. However, I am also mindful of the growth of this forum and the subsequent level of claims that the banks will either have to pay or defend.

 

Banks are large corporations and have entire legal departments as well as the money to pay (albeit derived from our charges) for external legal opinion. I feel sure that all of the banks will be considering their options and whilst they may be refunding charges currently, they will be investing heavily into trying to find a way to prevent having to pay out heavily in the future. How long will it really be before they can actually defend their charges? The actual cost of the charge may well appear to be dis-proportionate to the actual cost incurred and passed on by the institutution for a fully automated system, but how long will it be before they can justify these charges?

 

My own feeling is that they will start to defend the actions against them and will be preparing a justification of the charges. They just havent deemed it necessary to do this yet as it is probably cheaper to repay than defend for the small comparitively small number of claims they are being hit with. As time goes on and more and more people start to make claims the balance will shift and the banks will be forced into preparing a defence and I dont think it will be too long before we see this. I can already see ways in which they will attempt to justify these charges, but for obvious reasons have no wish to post it here. On the basis that I have recently started my own action against the Halifax, I hope it takes them a long long time to get their act together, but be aware, they will do it. For this reason, I believe there is a very narrow window of opportunity to succesfully make claims. Lets hope I am wrong!!!

[brindle]

I think you're right...

 

Small window of oppurtunity here...Take it and hit them hard while we can...

 

I personally see them re writing account contracts and the like to favour them so they can't be taken to court for the charges at a future date...

 

They will never stop charging....

[stubbarama]

While they can change the way they act in future, they cannot change the past and are open to 6 years worth of charges.

 

As you say, they have vast legal departments, and if they thought they could defend this successfully at the moment, they would and would squash it before it esculates, there reluctance to do so can mean only 1 thing.

[SPARKY100]

I agree with many of the comments voiced here that they may well be formulating an action for the future in the courts. Bankfodder is right, they may want to shape the future, but they cannot change the past. We should be mindful of their future opportunities, but we should not let them get away with the past. The very fact that they haven't defended in the court to date signifies that they are contravening contract law which says that charges must be negotiated at the opening of the contract, and be a fair reflection of the costs. Clearly they aren't. Don't lose hope of a recovery of your money!!

[SPARKY100]

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group