Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[tomterm8]

The most interesting thing about this is what the case DOESN'T cover. it covers the UTCCR and common law arguments that current cases rely on. it DOESN'T cover the unfair relationship terms of CCA 2006.

 

In effect, if the banks win, the result of the case will be void before the high court reaches its verdict.

[tomterm8]

How so?

 

All current cases are based on the common law, and also the unfair terms in contracts law.

 

However, for debts regulated under the CCA 2006, a new series of law - the unfair relationships test - has been introduced. This will take effect onj existing open credit agreements next year. The basis of the unfair relationships test is very much wider than the basis of the unfair terms in contracts, because it covers everything done or not done by the creditor.

 

the unfair terms in contract law covers only non-core terms, and has a higher benchmark as far as what is unfair.

 

Martin Lewis was present to respond to the woman who was present from the banking ombudsman.

 

Interestingly, he said that unless the banks refunded all penalty charges automatically as a result of this case then the OFT and FSA may have helped the banks in halting all claims until the test case is over.

 

FSA has introduced a waiver... meaning, FSA handled complaints will not be dealt with until after the test case.

 

Court claims WILL be dealt with, but they can apply for the court to stay proceedings while high court deals with it.

 

so, in effect, all cases are put into hold. however, if the banks lose they would be required by the FSA to introduce a compensation scheme for semi-automatic compensation.

 

 

 

 

Wonder if this works the other way- if they are taking legal action against someone when the debt includes a stack of unlawful charges?

 

It would really pee on the debt collector's collective bonfire if this could be used to force them to hang fire until after the test case....

 

 

Yes, it does. They MIGHT be able to get away with partial claims, however (i.e. claims without the penalty charges).

 

 

 

 

ADVICE TIME: BECAUSE OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, IT IS STILL IMPORTANT TO LAUCH CLAIMS FOR CHARGES THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM, SINCE ANY CHARGES MADE 4-6 YEARS AGO WILL NOT BE RECOVERED UNLESS YOU START THE ACTION

[tomterm8]

Has anyone read this?!

 

The Office of Fair Trading: Questions and answers for OFT test case announcement 26 July 2007

 

Point 11 is particularly interesting. Unless I'm reading it wrongly, it says that the OFT and banks have agreed to suspend any claims made to them pending the result of this test case.

 

That's to say, if you write to your bank or the OFT asking for your charges to be refunded, your claim will be put on hold.

 

If, however, you're at the court stage, the OFT press release is quite clear: "It will be for the courts to decide (how to proceed) in relation to claims made to them."

 

That's to say, it isn't necessarily the case that any claims already at the court stage will be suspended - though, I guess, the banks won't hesitate to apply for stays on this basis.

 

What do others reckon?!

 

Fred_Funk

 

In practice, i think that the courts will award a stay on the basis that the issues are being settled in the high court...

 

Sigh. Looks like the english justice system triumphs again:(

 

This is going to go to the House of Lords, so don't expect a result for at least 3 years.

[tomterm8]

hi i've got a pre hearing tomorrow will i still need to attend? or is my case going to be put on hold

 

You should attend.

 

Assuming that the result is a positive one, and I personally have my doubts, what about those who have claims that are currntly bordering on being Statute Barred?

 

Also, would the banks, assuming that we get the result we want, award interest for the years we have been forced to wait.

 

it's vital to submit the claims, 'cause otherwise they will become statute barred.

 

Interest question = yes.

[tomterm8]

Personally, instead of going through the court route, I would now go the financial ombudsman route...

[tomterm8]

I think my original post got lost due to so many listings at the same time.

I am worried and confused now.

The received the "General Form of Judgement or Order" as detailed below and have provided the information as requested by the Judge. I also provided to SCM full details of each charge and how worked out my interest etc as they requested it in a letter several weeks ago. I spoke to the court manager on the 23/7/07 who said Lloyds have failed to file at court a counter scedule and also they have not served anything on me. I even checked again on Tuesday with the court manager who said they definately not received anything.She told me to write to the judge asking for judgement which will be placed in my file that the file which will be given to the judge to look at next week who will then decide what happens next.She told me that in her experience if the defendant does not enter a counter claim by the deadline the judge will rule in the claiments favour. She also told me that because i their court dispensed with the Allocation questionare the bank will not be entitled to a stay of judgement.

I can almost taste the money but will this news today scupper that or as Lloyds failed to meet the deadline imposed by the Judge and it is so far down the line i can breath a sign of relief?

Surely my claim has gone too far and Lloyds cannot ask for anymore time etc???

Reading what Malaga1 wrote above "But the banks will be granted a waiver so they do not have to answer to any more complaints now" i guess this all might relate to any new claims just starting.

It reads as follows: Before District Judge Smith sitting at Grantham County Court, Harlaxton Road, Grantham Linc's

Upon reading the documents on file IT IS ORDERED THAT

1) The claiment do by 4:00pm on 9th July 2007 file at Court and serve on the defendant a scedule particularising each and every charge complained of together with the interest calculation.

2) The defendant do by 4.00pm 0n 23rd July 2007 file at Court and serve on the claimant a counter scedule in answer.

After compliance the District Judge will consider further.

Because this order has been made by the court without considering representations from the parties, the parties have the right to apply to have the right to apply to have the order set aside, varied or stayed. A party wishing to make an application must send or deliver the application to the court to arrive within 7 days of the date of service.

 

In your case, i would follow the case managers advice, but i would make sure to use special delivery.

 

It's up to the judge to decide... but I fear, even at this late stage if they apply for a stay it will be granted... However, once the court makes judgement, that'll be that.

[tomterm8]

Hi folks, Im due to put bundle in on Tues shall I carry on or are cases already in court system on hold as well

 

Yes.

 

 

Does this also mean therefore that if you are using unlawful charges in a defence against a bank that your case should be suspended also?

 

You can apply for a stay, yes.

[tomterm8]

Sorry tomterme being thick as usual carry on or not?

 

Carry on.

 

 

.....

 

In case anyone is wondering, In all cases brought before the court, you should carry on as normal, unless the court orders a stay.

[tomterm8]

I have sent it via special delivery and fax which the court manager has confirmed she has received. I am led to believe that because in my case laike some the allocation questionare was dispensed with so they cannot ask for a stay. If they could i thought it had to be requested within 7 days of service which is stated in the letter i received from the judge. What is the date of service??

 

they can apply for a stay of judgement on the basis of this test case, but you've done the right thing... no guarantees, but if they don't get their paperwork in order pronto, judgement will be granted in your favour. Just got to wait and stress it out, see what happens:(

[tomterm8]

I am really worried for peep's on here [and me] this is a VERY worrying time as the goal-posts have 'seemed' to have changed, although the law remains - as IS

 

basically, it's not so much the goal posts are being moved, it is that the real game is about to start.

 

Even as we speak, hundreds of soliciters and dozens of barristers are being hired.

 

Go Go the OFT!

[tomterm8]

My previous post seems to have got lost in the mayhem! I was actually trying to say that...we all knew the banks wouldn't take this lying down and we must all have expected them to come up with some devious plan lol! But before we all panic have you noticed the lack of input from the ones with the knowledge(apart from TOMTOM!) We are not screwed yet...as we speak the great ones of this site and Martin Lewis(bless him) are working hard to come up with WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON! plan. So don't panic all is not lost yet..trust in the people who have helped us this far.

 

We are not screwed at all, LOL. Calm down, everyone:)

 

I, for one, am going to be launching a F.O.S. complaint tomorrow... business as usual:) I expect a delay, but the actual law on our side is very, very strong.

 

And, the process is now very simple. Much more so than yesterday. Write a complaint letter, and if the OFT wins, get your money back.

[tomterm8]

I'm getting reports of MCOL (Money Claim Online) actually refunding peoples court fees for recent claims covered by the test case...

 

 

 

Has anyone checked their credit card balances, if they went the court route? Are peoples court claims getting cancelled?

[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.

[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.

[tomterm8]

That would make no difference, the 6 years run from date of filing claim at court, not from letters.

 

 

Are you sure? under the F.S.O. waiver, all complaints are to be dealt with after the trial on the same basis as if the waiver had not taken place...

 

So if you complain under the F.S.O scheme, the complaint will remain active.

[tomterm8]

Playing Devil's Advocate here for a minute...

 

Regardless of the arguments for and against, how might this affect anyone who was asking for contractual interest (componded)?

 

I appreciate, it's a complex argument, but it has, on occasions, succeeded in the past. Any claims now put on hold will, in all probability, have gone through the roof by the time this is concluded.

 

Anyone got any idea how this will be dealt with? It seems to me if the banks can still levy their charges while a decision is pending then, by the same logic, contractual interest (compounded) should also be allowable.

 

Any thoughts?!

 

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

[tomterm8]

And to force the banks to process claims pending the outcome.

 

I presonally have got around £15K in court with Abbey & Barclies, now I have to wait 2 bloody years to ge tthat back. That's if the ruling goes against the banks, and I think there are now a lot of people now coming to terms that this just may not happen

 

No court would order that:x

 

Ach, life sucks:)

[tomterm8]

The letter which i received from the court dated 21/6/07 ordered that i supply a list of all my charges because the allocation questionare was dispensed with. I had to provide this information to the court and the defendant by 4pm on the 23/7/07 which i did. The defendant (Lloyds) had to serve on me and file a t court a counter schedule by 4pm on the 23/7/07 which they failed to do. I have sent a request for judgement form to the court and Judge Smith will look at the case on Monday coming. Apparently my court only deal with bank charges cases on Mondays. In this letter i mentioned above it did say someting along the lines if either party want to request a stay they have to do so within 7 dyas of service. I assume the service date is the date the letter was sent by the judge. If so they are not entitled to ask for a stay but will this test case (stitch up) over rule this or is the judge likely to look at the case individually and rule in my favour due to Lloyds not complying with his orders? If me case was heard in a bigger court i might have had a judgement by now instead of having to wait a week until the judge reappears

 

Lunatic Flea, you're hopping mad over this, aren't you?

 

( sorry, couldn't resist).

[tomterm8]

YOU ARE NOT!!!!!

 

 

YOU SHOULD STILL CLAIM...

It may just take a little longer to get your money

[tomterm8]

Sorry for the big text thingie, but it is vital to claim, either by filing a formal complaint with the bank (if you want to go through the F.O.S. system) OR a court claim. You should do this A.S.A.P, within the normal time frame, 'cause it costs you money if you don't.

 

 

YOU CAN CLAIM FOR CREDIT CARDS, OVERDRAFTS, THE LOT. EXACTLY THE SAME PROCEDURE AS A WEEK AGO.

[tomterm8]

O.K.

 

 

Once you start a court claim, however long the court claim takes... it doesn't matter, because it's the day the action starts that determins whether the statute of limitations applion.

 

Hence my big text above.

[tomterm8]

I have to agree with Wild Bill on some points, although calling people stupid is not one of them.

 

I is rather tedious going through all of the posts and getting to the end with nothing but a sore head.

 

The same points being raised, same questions asked time and time again.

 

Hey... nothing succeeds like no-one knowing what the heck is happening:)

 

People need reassurance, and... um... that's a little repetative in places.

 

The Forum moderators HAVE posted a response thread that's closed... this one is for people to, you know, repeatedly ask the same questions, and raise the same points.

 

P.S, did i mention already, people should stay on timetable, and STILL CLAIM?

 

 

Mabe the moderators could start athread that us little people can only read, and not contribute to. That way we would be reading knowledgeable advice and thoughts, instead of 15 pages of public oppinion.

 

Already been done. At the moment, no-one really knows what's going to happen...

 

 

I would also like to commend bookworm for your babysitting everybody through this frustrating time.

 

Patience of a saint.

[tomterm8]

12 months for a verdict and then another 12 for the appeal. Meanwhile the charges are racking up again

 

I think you'll find that this case is very much fast-tracked. I believe that it will take 6 months for a verdict, 3 each for the two appeals (appeals court, house of lords... ). Plus, extra time for europe.

 

At the moment, I'm laying odds that it will be a full house sitting.

[tomterm8]

I seem to have been called out so who am I to disappoint.

 

If by trolling you mean correcting other members' factual inaccuracies then, yes, I'm trolling. I am seriously frustrated that only a handful of people on this thread have bothered to read the OFT statement or FSA statement for themselves. You would think that with £000s of their own money at stake it would be the first thing they would do. Some of the inaccuracies and questions show they haven't bothered to inform themselves, which is always a bug-bear with me in any form of life. To make matters worse, they then make posts which are just wrong, which only confuses the matter. Don't say let's all e-mail the OFT when you're complaining about the waiver and it is the FSA that needs to be contacted if you're so inclined.

 

Which brings me to the lack of netiquette. This is a long thread with a lot of information in between a lot of misinformation. But there is no excuse for not reading the thread before posting a question. If you care so much about this issue then 10 minutes doing some back reading isn't too much is it? You might find your question has been answered. Or you might find that some of the inaccuracies you're about to post, most likely confusing the OFT and FSA it seems, have been clarified. Or whether CC claims should go on. Or whether claims should still be made at all. Does that sound reasonable or does it sound like trolling? I'd be far more worried about the members giving off negative messages about whether it is worth still claiming. Troll you say?

 

This thread has revealed a lot and what I'm about to say won't be very popular. This is a tremendous site with some very knowledgeable altrusistic people. There are others unfortunately who aren't but it is very disappointing to see people rally against what is in train because it is so much bigger than any one person. Someone said they didn't want the law clarified because "consumers are onto a good thing". Really? All consumers? Or just those who look at this website and have the money or inclination to take things further? Others have said it is costly, stressful and time consuming going to court , which it is is. Not exactly a "good thing" and this action could stop all that. What is really annoying some people is the timing of the action and it cutting across their claims- not whether there is a case or not. Bit selfish really. And as for those who are annoyed because they have spent the money before they've received it:o

 

I've already talked about the paranoia running through the thread. If we haven't worked out by now that the banks don't always tell the truth then we'll never learn it. So don't be so sure this is all part of a ploy that they're so happy to be going to court. They're still paying out a lot less then they will have to if this goes all the way, not to mention future revenue streams. Might want to check out the libel laws too before saying this is all part of a gigantic ploy between OFT, FSA and the banks. And look under the bed for any monsters too... and Lord Lucan while you're at it.

 

So if that is trolling then so be it. I prefer to think of it as a call for careful thought, individual responsibility, and common sense.

 

What gets me about so much of this thread is that people don't understand the regulatory framework. Yeah, the press release from the banks say "we're co-operating with the law suit", but how many times do you see that in the newspapers about some crook caught red handed with his hands in the cookie jar.

 

The OFT could take this to court without any agreement... they have the full legal power to do so. Instead, they've made an agreement to limit the costs, and to ensure that the case runs smoothly... and that the banks actually resolve the matter once and for all!

 

This is exactly what people on Consumer Action group have said they wanted all along!

 

The idea that the OFT, and particularly the minister in charge of the OFT, is going to risk the bad publicity such a deal would cause... is rediculous. If the minister loses this case, he likely loses his job. I'm sure 500,000 consumers are gonna really love him.

 

And the idea that the FSA have launched the waiver, so they're gonna ignore everything the banks do for the next year... Uh, yeah, right, they just started the process of investigating two banks yesterday.

 

Lots is going on in secret. And that worries people. but it is an inevitable consequence of legal action at this level.

[tomterm8]

Wild Billy

 

PS My question, earlier on this thread, regarding how claims involving contractual interest (compounded) may be affected by these delays probably falls into the ill-conceived category but, try as I might, I can't find an answer anywhere. Don't suppose you'd like to speculate as to how it might map out.

 

You can't claim contractual interest; that has already been settled at precedent setting levels. For statutory interest, the claims will continue accruing 8% interest for the duration of the stay.