First victory to Lloyds

[BankFodder]

Birmingham County Court - this morning.

 

Judge held that Lloyds' charges are a fee for a service.

 

Claimant's claim for £2,445 dismissed.

More to follow

[Curlyben]

[PPMAN159]

A very worrying development.

 

Do we think that the judge was got at?

[Champnos]

A dear o dear, filing my court case in 24 hours. Still we dont know what was claimed, maybe something else went wrong! Will wait for more info. Did they turn up? blimey!

[davethorp]

Well I won today at least. But that is shocking news. How can the judge justify a fee so high as being a fee for a service?

[jshtr3]

As always I assume the devil will be in the detail. Made my heart sink when I read it though. Really glad I don't live in Brum!

[FunnyMan]

Let us wait to find out what happened in this case.

 

It would seem to go so against the trend that to think the worst would be premature to say the least.

[TeamD]

One assumes there will be an appeal?

[broke dave]

We need to keep this at the top and find out all of the details.

dave

[bally35]

whaaat????

oh no oh no on oh no!!!!!!!!

[ataction]

Curious this judge seems to be out of the loop. Do you think he banks with Lloyds?

[davethorp]

Might be a shareholder ;-)

[jshtr3]

He may also have listened to the arguments and decided in favour of the bank because he believes their argument is correct. The strangest things happen!!!!

[PKea]

I suppose it all depends on what his POC were.

I wonder where he got his info from?

 

Does anyone know them?

[FunnyMan]

If this case is appealed could it not be that the bank will be forced to disclose and argue all its defence against the initial claim? I am not sure on this, but if the above is correct then the judge would be forcing the banks hand on this matter.

 

I may well be well out of the ball park on this but I am looking for a possible reason why the judge might have ruled the way he has (without even knowing the ruling in detail yet of course).

[jshtr3]

If this case is appealed could it not be that the bank will be forced to disclose and argue all its defence against the initial claim?

 

If this is the case then surely they'd just pay before the appeal, this serving no purpose but a further delay?

[PKea]

Well, He's going to be the most hatest Judge in the UK me thinks.

 

I'm, glad I'm not filing in Brum, but it must worry some people there who are claiming

[toddle2u]

This is not good news (understatement). I have a Court date in Worcester on Friday!

[PKea]

BBC NEWS | Business | Bank's overdraft charges upheld

[Champnos]

Interesting but i still think the Judge has as Consumer Group commented made a mistake. A banks charge for going over your overdraft is ridiculous, you have an agreed overdraft then they let you go over it in order to make money out of you. If they didnt let you go over they would just bounce the item costing them a mere £2, thus i would hope for a successful appeal on this one. Happier now to proceed with my court claim.

[granby]

kk the first thing is not to panic

i noticed that they have supposedly put a written defense in early

they could be going down the citi route that was used in Ireland

but before anyone panics lets wait for dust to settle

and get all the facts

[jshtr3]

After reading that link words fail me.

[Purplenaartjie]

Now I am worried. I've just had Lloyds' defence to my claim, the case is transferred to the Central London County Court Castle vs Lloyds TSB - Penalty Charges Forum

[flower19]

Oh dear, can this be possible??!!

 

I am so glad my claim has already been settled.

 

I wonder if there is more to this particular claim apart from what has been reported for the judge to make such a decision.

 

I would like to know how this will affect future claimants.

 

Flower

[fuzz33]

oh no, i was worried enough before i read that!