Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[dori2o]

A question for the MODS:

 

If the advice here is to continue filing a court claim, and in all likelyhood this will end in the bank applying for a stay. Would it be possible to get a template sorted which will set out our argument for the stay to be lifted/refused?

[Catlover64]

This is the news clip from Channel 4 if anyone's interested....

 

Channel4 - Player

[zootscoot]

A question for the MODS:

 

If the advice here is to continue filing a court claim, and in all likelyhood this will end in the bank applying for a stay. Would it be possible to get a template sorted which will set out our argument for the stay to be lifted/refused?

 

Give us a chance it was only anounced a few hours ago.

 

In the mean time you might like to take a look at the new template POCs:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/

[Lunatic Flea]

A question for the MODS:

 

 

 

Give us a chance it was only anounced a few hours ago.

 

In the mean time you might like to take a look at the new template POCs:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/

Hi zootscoot

I am worried like thousands of other people and wondered what your feelings are and what do you rate my chances are.I am due to receive judgement on Monday after Lloyds failed to serve a counter scedule on me or file at court a counter schedule by the 23/7/07 as ordered by the court. I supplied the District Judge with the information he ordered by 9th July. I have filed a request for judgement to the District judge who i have been told will look at my case when he returns next Monday

Hopefully i will win. After tomorrows case will the bank have to ask for stay in each individual case by informeing the relevent court etc and would this have to be done by post. If so do you think Lloyds will not be able to post in time for my case in time. Will any Judge put off any decesion after being made aware of this test case out do they have to wait to receive a request from the bank for a stay?

[tomterm8]

Hi zootscoot

 

ask for stay in each individual case by informeing the relevent court etc and would this have to be done by post. If so do you think Lloyds will not be able to post in time for my case in time. Will any Judge put off any decesion after being made aware of this test case out do they have to wait to receive a request from the bank for a stay?

 

They wouldn't have to write 10,000 letters, no. all they would need to do is send a letter to each court with a schedule of related cases asking for a stay in all cases related to the test case. Something they could do in less than an hour, and have probably already prepared prior to the announcement.

 

They could send it by fax, but I would expect them to send the letter by courier given its importance.

 

 

As for whether the stay is granted... it's up to the discretion of each court. No one can really give any guidance on it, until they see how it pans out.

[dori2o]

 

 

 

Give us a chance it was only anounced a few hours ago.

 

 

Sorry, Didn't word it correctly. All I meant was, considering it is likely now that we are going to start getting these requests for stays, is it something yu will be looking at, sort of thing.

[Lunatic Flea]

They wouldn't have to write 10,000 letters, no. all they would need to do is send a letter to each court with a schedule of related cases asking for a stay in all cases related to the test case. Something they could do in less than an hour, and have probably already prepared prior to the announcement.

 

They could send it by fax, but I would expect them to send the letter by courier given its importance.

 

 

As for whether the stay is granted... it's up to the discretion of each court. No one can really give any guidance on it, until they see how it pans out.

I can't believe that i am days away from possibly winning and now chances are i am going to have to wait to at least the end of the year. All the way through my case which has been running for around four months i have never received an offer. I will have to kept my fingers crossed and hope the district Judge in my case rules in my favour. Never know he may be miffed that Lloyds did not comply with his orders and throw his weight about

[killat]

i think is is going to be longer than just the end of the year. I dont think the case will go to trial until 2008 at least, then it still could take ages.

 

any prediction out there mid 2008,2009 or even 2010

 

once this is sorted what happens with the stature of limitations, if we can only go back 6 years and it take 2 years to get a decision on this case the banks could save bilions of ponds??

[silou]

To be honest I don't really know enough about the law etc to have a view on whether this test case will be a good thing long term or not although I suppose it was bound to happen at some point. What makes me furious though is that while this test case runs its course, it seems to me, that we the consumers have been shafted again! If I'm reading this right everything is now on hold until the test case is concluded (which I'm sure might take years) yet the banks can still keep taking these outragous charges from us. I could understand if new complaints were to be put on hold till this is done but surely anyone who has got past the stage of sending the first letter to the bank asking for charges back should still have their complaint dealt with and as for those who have already gone down the MCOL route and paid out for it I think the fact that the banks could request these cases to stayed pending outcome of the test case is a disgrace. I just hope that the 'wise ones' of all the forums out there come up with an action plan for us, because I (and I'm sure many others) think the fact that we're now supposed to sit and twiddle our thumbs whilst still being charged until this is decided is outragous!

[invictus]

once this is sorted what happens with the stature of limitations, if we can only go back 6 years and it take 2 years to get a decision on this case the banks could save bilions of ponds??

 

I don't know for sure but I would think that if you make your claim thru FOS now then they will say the bank should pay 6 from the the date of your complaint to FOS.

 

I'd rather take my chances with the very sensible, in most instances, County Courts and District Judges.

[tomterm8]

i think is is going to be longer than just the end of the year. I dont think the case will go to trial until 2008 at least, then it still could take ages.

 

any prediction out there mid 2008,2009 or even 2010

 

once this is sorted what happens with the stature of limitations, if we can only go back 6 years and it take 2 years to get a decision on this case the banks could save bilions of ponds??

 

The period the claim is stayed is immaterial as far as the statute of limitations is concerned, since recovery action has already started.

[Destinyofsouls]

The banks must now be laughing their socks off!

Just goes to show what happens within the hierarchy with this country, where we cannot be a part of.

I said a couple of days ago in one of my threads that I felt that 'something was going on' that we were not privvy to, and now I know!

I have just been having a look at the new POC's, but isn't it a no brainer now? You pay your court fees and the bank get a stay and you have to wait 2 yrs for your money?

I assume the only way forward for the time being is to show true hardship, and the banks still have to act.

[adamc6671]

Hi All

 

I agree with Destinyofsouls - the banks must indeed be laughing!

 

Having read all the info I can find on this test case, it seems to me that until this prooves wether or not the UTCCR's and Law of penalties are relevant to bank charge claims, none of us are going anywhere!

 

The banks have the right to apply for a waiver of their obligation to investigate claims of this nature until the case is settled, which as many have said could be years from now especially if it goes all the way to the top, and every Court now has the option of staying every claim for the same period of time!!!!!!!!!!

 

If the OFT win, then nothing has really changed from how it is right now - the UTCCR's etc apply, which every case already assumes they do. If the OFT loose, we all loose! On top of that, as already said, this could well take years to resolve.

 

How on earth does any of that benefit the consumer????????????

 

All the best - Adam

[Destinyofsouls]

Notwithstanding the fact that now the banks have a major upper hand. They make a poultry offer ( although I doubt they will make any offer now) and you have to decide whether to accept it. If you don't, AND THEY WIN, YOU LOSE EVERYTHING!! If the OFT are on the consumer side then why introduce such a stupid clause?

[chriselaine]

I don't think this test case will ever actually get to court. In view of the fact that the OFT are going to announce later this year what they think a 'fair' charge is, I think the banks just want to wait for that. Once they have that figure to work with they will either counter claim against all cases already waiting at the courts, or make offers to everyone who hasn't gone that far yet. Either way they won't have nearly as much to pay out and court fees won't have to be repaid either.

[Fred_Funk]

I don't think this test case will ever actually get to court. In view of the fact that the OFT are going to announce later this year what they think a 'fair' charge is, I think the banks just want to wait for that. Once they have that figure to work with they will either counter claim against all cases already waiting at the courts, or make offers to everyone who hasn't gone that far yet. Either way they won't have nearly as much to pay out and court fees won't have to be repaid either.

 

I don't think that's how it's going to map out.

 

The OFT may well reveal, at some point, what they think a 'fair' charge is.

 

However, as has already been established with credit cards - where the OFT said what they thought would be a fair charge - that can't be applied retrospectively.

 

The charges incurred are either unlawful, as one hopes the test case will confirm, or not. Assuming it's the former, the banks will still be liable for those charges in their entirety.

 

Someone tell me I'm right please! ;-)

[Destinyofsouls]

Maybe that 'fair charge' scenario will now be out on hold pending the outcome of this case.

And even if it did happen, as long as the banks refuse to divulge the actual costs we would still be able to reclaim all of it like credit cards.

I'm afraid I think these folks have got into bed with each other and the judicial system to 'agree' what should happen, and I think that most of it has already been agreed.

** Thank you Mr OFT- You can pull your pants up now! Your welcome MR Chief Exec banker!**

 

Anyone for another Ferro rocher and a rather large cuban?

James, can you have security remove that rabble from outside? God knows who these consumers think they are! Do they not know that we care more about lining our pockets than them? tut tut when will they ever learn?

[paulson1985]

The trouble now is .

 

The Judges now do not have an option,

 

As I understand it ,No District Judge can give a ruling on a case when a similar case is going through a higher court.

 

Even if he were to give a decision the banks would appeal pending the decision in the Higher court.

 

I can see claims being stayed all over the place now.

 

On a brighter note if the banks loose and the OFT must think they have got a case, It will be very easy to reclaim your charges all you will need to do is send the banks a letter quoting the ruling, and the banks will have to return your money.

 

That being the case GAG and everybody else involved in this campaign will have achieved total victory.

 

In a way they have already achieved a victory by forcing the banks into court.

[Destinyofsouls]

On another note, I understand from a few people that Abbey were offering 65% of the claim prior to the AQ being sent back, something they never did before. And I also hear that LLoyds were settling just as the summons hit the desk.

 

Could this have any relation to this case?

[ss_collins]

can the banks still apply charges?

[Enron]

The woman from the British Banking Association was giving very ambiguous replies when she was asked whether she thought the charges that customers were currently paying were fair.

[jubaxt]

dont know whether i might have my wires crossed but might this not have an effect in the consumers favour.

if the case goes in the consumers favour SURELY

1)any pending cases will continue to gain at least stat interest until settled

2)if banks are at risk of this it may encourage them to settle now

3)could OFT possibly be doing us a favour

 

why is it that most cases seem to have been settled more promptly recently without going to court

[Bookworm]

I don't think this test case will ever actually get to court. In view of the fact that the OFT are going to announce later this year what they think a 'fair' charge is, I think the banks just want to wait for that. Once they have that figure to work with they will either counter claim against all cases already waiting at the courts, or make offers to everyone who hasn't gone that far yet. Either way they won't have nearly as much to pay out and court fees won't have to be repaid either.

 

That is one serious misunderstanding of things. The OFT have always said they can't say what "fair" is, and that only a court can say that. That's what happened with the credit cards, and people (and c/c companies, natch! ) jumped on the £12 figure as meaning that the OFT had sais that £12 was fair. They didn't, not then, not now. What they said was that that the level at which they themselves would intervene.

 

The OFT word is not law. If it were, they wouldn't need to go to court.

 

I think we'll get a better idea of how it's going to go (and if we have been stitched up, which I personally reckon) once the judge has been appointed.

[Bookworm]

if the case goes in the consumers favour SURELY - "IF" is the key word here.

1)any pending cases will continue to gain at least stat interest until settled - Correct

2)if banks are at risk of this it may encourage them to settle now - I doubt it. They always have made a point of waiting as long as they could, and certainly until claim had been filed. So many people are going to be put off by this "test" case now and give up that the OFT is ALREADY doing the banks a favour.

3)could OFT possibly be doing us a favour - Cases stayed for months, possibly years, people put off reclaiming what's lawfully theirs, people still accruing charges whilst they can't gain recourse, still being defaulted, pushed into bankrupcy, harassed... Yeah, BIG favour they're doing this. And all the while, a niggling feeling that the decision has already been made, and that it is not going to give us our full rights...

 

why is it that most cases seem to have been settled more promptly recently without going to court - I don't know where you have seen this, even Barclays have become more bolshy recently.

[jubaxt]

point taken bookworm lol

 

i should have been paying £250 fee to file £6500 against lloyds today-feel nauseas and in dont want to do anything today mode now!!