Koala Attack Vs Barclays

[Micky the Hippo]

stayed until Feb? as a result of the OFT's action

 

offs

[koalaattack]

Hi Micky - stayed until at least February because of the OFT action.

 

What I want to know is this - if, sorry, when the OFT find that the charges are unlawful what will happen? Say for example they do as they did with the credit card charges and say they should only be £12 then will those of us who are in the system and who have claim on hold get a ruling immediately (and of the full amount) or will we have to wait and then have to recalculate everything based on the OFT suggestion? And who will instigate this?

 

Cheers.

 

KA

[Micky the Hippo]

pain in the arse news, three of mine about to get a date and I was semi relying on seeing the money before Oct for some large bills

 

bah

 

I can't help thinking that they'll fudge it and compromise with the banks, they've got so much influence and resources, presumably they didn;t enjoy being treated like everyone else in the courts and will come up with some cosy fix that they can live with

[tezl]

Hi Micky - stayed until at least February because of the OFT action.

 

What I want to know is this - if, sorry, when the OFT find that the charges are unlawful what will happen? Say for example they do as they did with the credit card charges and say they should only be £12 then will those of us who are in the system and who have claim on hold get a ruling immediately (and of the full amount) or will we have to wait and then have to recalculate everything based on the OFT suggestion? And who will instigate this?

 

Cheers.

 

KA

not a chance in hell that they will prove them unlawful,every man and his dog would get full amount then.this is damage limitation.the banks will reduce charges and hope to wriggle out of any sort of repayment of difference.the only thing then is whats stopping claiming charges back through courts again.the banks will try and get deal,if we reduce charges we will want some sort of imunity from further court action.tez

[Micky the Hippo]

The OFT is at least in theory working in the interests of the consumer though isn't it?

 

[tezl]

nail on head in theory,i am just naturally suspicious been in buisness to long. smell a rat,dont trust many people where moneys concerned,this is a country where some one can go bust on friday owing ordinary people thousands,then open up on monday, new premises,new stock,with a clear- consciance-.bsts.what influence will goverment try on, secretly of course.would not know figure all charges would come to,but the chancelor of exchequer will be short of few quid in tax beleive me.tez

[Micky the Hippo]

I quite agree with you

 

sadly

[koalaattack]

not a chance in hell that they will prove them unlawful,every man and his dog would get full amount then.this is damage limitation.the banks will reduce charges and hope to wriggle out of any sort of repayment of difference.the only thing then is whats stopping claiming charges back through courts again.the banks will try and get deal,if we reduce charges we will want some sort of imunity from further court action.tez

 

Tezl - are you saying that all of the work we have done so far is for nothing and that we will have to go through all this again? Statements, LBA, court date etc? Also, does that mean the current claim will be struck out and we will have lost the money we all spent on court costs?

 

Also, if the banks cannot prove that the true cost of unauthorised borrowing is £30 a time then surely they are acting unlawfully? Or is that a little niaive?

 

Surely that's not the way this'll work otherwise the banks have won and we may as well give up now as basically the more money you have the less you have to act within the law.

 

If this happens I am more than up for a riot, may be we could try the Czech way and all wave our house keys at the same time all over the country?

[clubber]

The storming of the Bastille part deux. The storming of Churchill Place (floor 29)

[koalaattack]

There's a song by a bloke called Chris TT which is about how everyone should put there money under their matress and screw the banks.

 

I wonder if work can do a BACS transfer to under my bed?

[clubber]

Gonna do the same.. it'd be about time there was some interest accruing in my bedroom!!

[saintly_1]

Gonna do the same.. it'd be about time there was some interest accruing in my bedroom!!

 

Too much info there clubber lol

[koalaattack]

Clubber, surely if you get the money then that'll generate interest?! Get the cash, make a sign and hang out around the Big Brother house on a Friday night - that should take care of it!

[koalaattack]

Hi guys,

Long time no speak and all of that - I hope you're all well and fighting on regardless.

I was listening to Five Live on the way home last night and they interviewed a woman from Lloyds TSB because they have cut their charges. Her explanation was:

"This isn't because of the OFT case, the fact that we've (they've) paid back £36m in charges or the fact that the charges are unlawful as we (they) are happy that the charges are perfectly fair - it's because it's what our customers asked us to do and we listen to our customers".

Brilliant! I think we should all write to Barclays and ask for £1m each as I would really like that. Hopefully they would follow Lloyd's lead and listen to what us customers want.

Here's a link to the story:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6987110.stm

Could this form part of our evidence? This is really annoying me now, especially given some of Barclays bully boy tactics - don't let them get to you Lemon, just do what Slick advised and you'll be fine. The interviewer last night even asked whether they were prepared to lower them further given that the OFT may advise this and she replied:

"Again, we are perfectly happy that our charges are lawful and fair which is why we are prepared to defend them in court at any time"

Two questions: 1) apart from after the announcement of the OFT investigation (when all they do is apply for a stay anyway and not actually offer any defence!), when has any bank defended a claim? and 2) why, if all of these banks are so sure of their "lawful and fair" charges, have they not fully disclosed the true cost to them and ended all of these court cases once and for all, instead preferring to pay out over £1bn to claimants?!

I'm fed up of stock responses and damn right lies I'm afraid.

Cheers,

KA

[tezl]

Hi guys,

 

Long time no speak and all of that - I hope you're all well and fighting on regardless.

 

I was listening to Five Live on the way home last night and they interviewed a woman from Lloyds TSB because they have cut their charges. Her explanation was:

 

"This isn't because of the OFT case, the fact that we've (they've) paid back £36m in charges or the fact that the charges are unlawful as we (they) are happy that the charges are perfectly fair - it's because it's what our customers asked us to do and we listen to our customers".

 

Brilliant! I think we should all write to Barclays and ask for £1m each as I would really like that. Hopefully they would follow Lloyd's lead and listen to what us customers want.

 

Here's a link to the story:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6987110.stm

 

Could this form part of our evidence? This is really annoying me now, especially given some of Barclays bully boy tactics - don't let them get to you Lemon, just do what Slick advised and you'll be fine. The interviewer last night even asked whether they were prepared to lower them further given that the OFT may advise this and she replied:

 

"Again, we are perfectly happy that our charges are lawful and fair which is why we are prepared to defend them in court at any time"

 

Two questions: 1) apart from after the announcement of the OFT investigation (when all they do is apply for a stay anyway and not actually offer any defence!), when has any bank defended a claim? and 2) why, if all of these banks are so sure of their "lawful and fair" charges, have they not fully disclosed the true cost to them and ended all of these court cases once and for all, instead preferring to pay out over £1bn to claimants?!

 

I'm fed up of stock responses and damn right lies I'm afraid.

 

Cheers,

 

KA

hi ka,

i heard this as well,

why dont these interviewers ask the questions we would ask,like yours,

they get them there and then let them off hook.

wish geremy paxton would have interview with her,

they would be guilty by virtue of silence.

tez

[koalaattack]

Hi Tez,

 

I know what you mean but sadly I think they probably have some form of "understanding", also, I bet the interviewer has limited interest in the story, it's just another part of his day, so he probably has limited research - I guess that's the trouble with getting so much into a programme. I was tempted to text or email in when I got home but I figured I would just be ignored. Actually, I'm going to do that now...

 

Cheers,

 

KA

[koalaattack]

Just sent this to Five Live, no doubt it'll be ignored but it's worth a go I guess:

 

"Hi guys,

 

I was listening to your show yesterday on the way home from work (as I do most evenings) and I was interested to hear the lady from Lloyds TSB explaining their rational for reducing their charges. I thought it was interesting that she twice stated that Lloyds are happy that their charges are lawful and that they would be happy to defend this in court.

 

I know this is a little late to ask now but, rhetorically speaking, I was just wondering whether she would be able to point to any occasion that any bank has fully disclosed and successfully defended their charges in court (apart from after the announcement of the OFT investigation when they have merely applied for stays to claims and not offered any evidence as a form of defence). I would also be interested to know why, if they are so confident that their charges are so lawful and fair, banks have paid back over £1bn in charges to claimants in out of court settlements – surely the sensible thing to do would be to turn up, fully disclose the information that shows the charges are fair and lawful and put an end to all of the other claims that are waiting in the pipeline.

 

I wonder why they haven’t done this yet.

 

Thanks,

 

KA."

Be interesting to here what she would have to say to that, saddly I suspect I never will though!

 

Cheers,

 

KA.

[tezl]

hi,ka,

would have been good to say also, we think this is worthy of a debate on the morning show.

perhaps if everyone e mailed in requesting this they might oblidge.

post e mail adress

,see if it works,its all adding pressure.

tez

[slick132]

Hi KA,

 

Good for you with the letter to 5Live.

 

Slick

[koalaattack]

Cheers Slick, got me nowhere though did it?!

 

I'm currently buying a house and have a load of extra money going out (I could have really used the £6,500 right now but never mind!) so I have just increased my overdraft with Barclays to avoid yet more charges (it's unbelievable that out action is stayed and yet they can plough on regardless).

 

The thing that struck me was how concise and deliberate the bloke dealing with it was, they are so much more polite and open about everything it's untrue.

 

I took heart from this as, even though I don't have my money (yet), at least Barclays are beinging to see that they can't treat us as badly as they were before. I guess it's a small victory.

 

Cheers,

 

KA

[koalaattack]

Stupid computer! Ignore this and see below as that's what I tried to post here! Sorry.

[koalaattack]

Hi guys,

I spoke to a customer services person at Barclays yesterday and she mentioned bank charges, basically she asked whether I'd ever had any repaid. I laughed and said that I actually had a court case on hold at the moment because of the OFT to which she replied...

1) why did you go to court - why not just speak to us?

2) when did you ask for them as I (she) got all of mine back about a week before the OFT case

3) Oh well, it's a shame and it's a delay but you'll get all of the charges back I'm sure

I was stunned to be honest but I guess you can't really take point three as gospel really can you given her position in the company (with all due respect to her - I'm sure she won't be deciding who gets what and when!). I was surprised by point two too as I always thought that anyone who works for a bank is banned from having an overdraft or is that just for people who advise/chastise people on their banking habits?

As for point one, I politely pointed out that I did contact Barclays and that I have at least two emails telling me they would settle my claim.

Anyway, I'm not sure whether that conversation made me feel better or worse to be honest!

Cheers,

KA.

[saintly_1]

To point 1 hope you said 'I did contact Barclays and got told politely to go away ...... which is why i ended up going to court' ?

[koalaattack]

Basically yes I did Slick! Her response was "COURT?! Why are you going to court? Why not just ask us?"

 

I explained it was quite a lot and that I had asked them a number of times but had no luck hence court - I don't think she understood really if I'm honest. Actually, if I'm honest, I don't think she cared!

 

Cheers,

 

KA

[slick132]

Koala,

 

Do what I asked Electric Lemon to do. Pop in to your branch with your up to date SOC's and tell them, if they pay cash now, you'll let them off the AQ fee.

 

Let us know when you've been paid !?!

 

Slick