Yorkshire Bank - Business Charges

[100mel]

I'm posting the following which I've just received from the FOS in response to my claim against Yorkshire

As outlined in our last letter, the bank recently told us that hereon in it proposed to 'defend' complaints that its default charges were illegal or unlawful as it did not believe that it had done anything wrong, nor that any refund of those fees was warranted. However, in response to our enquiries, the bank undertook to provide fuller details/evidence to support its position once it had obtained advice from its external legal advisers.

By way of further explanation the legal action brought by the OFT against the banks is to determine whether it has the power to investigate default fees levied on personal bank account customers. Whilst the judge found in favour of the OFT at the hearing in April 2008, the banks subsequently appealed that decision and the matter has been referred to the Court of Appeal. Because business accounts do not form part of the current OFT investigation, as industry regulator the FSA instructed banks to resume dealing with such complaints. It is for this reason that we have been able to consider complaints about default fees on business accounts.

I acknowledge that you contend the default fees levied by the bank are disproportionate to the cost it incurs of performing the task - your argument therefore appears to be that by acting in this manner the bank is charging a penalty and thus is breaching 'common law'. However, the gist of the bank's initial response is that at the OFT High Court hearing in April 2008, the judge expressed the opinion that such charges would not be considered to be penalties; it follows that the bank is of the opinion that it has not breached common law, nor done anything unlawful. Consequently, its argument appears to be that there is no requirement for what it charges to approximate to its costs.

Nevertheless, until we have received and considered the bank's submission in detail, it is not possible to assess properly the validity of those arguments. In the circumstances the purpose of our last letter was to make all those customers so affected aware of the bank's stance given the effect it undoubtedly will have on the resolution of their complaint. We will keep you updated as matters develop.



Mel

[caro]

They clearly haven't heard of the Plain English Society.

[100mel]

I referred my claim for unreasonable penalty charges to the FOS back in April 08. To date Yorkshire Bank have refused point blank to settle or discuss with FOS

The latest response YB refers to the OFT case and says that the penalties have not breached common law nor have they done anything unlawful. I had asked them for a precise breakdown of its costs on such charges - the response is that it is not required to justify how they are calculated. It believes that the decision in the courts in relation to personal accounts applies equally to its business terms and conditions and that it has done nothing unlawful...........

I would be interested in anyone's comments on this or any other experiences with YB on business charges

Mel

[Carpetbagger]

Some of my experiences here, I am a lot more clued up now than I was when I posted this.
Carperbagger vs Yorkshire Bank- Club account claim?

Basically YB refused to give me refund on the grounds that the account is not governed by the consumer credit act because it is a business account. Even though it is a club account and I therefore cannot speak to a business adviser when I go in the bank!! Also it is a club account which no-one at YB can give me any terms and conditions for because they seem to have discontinued them.
My main problem is that YB also couldn't manage to change the account over into a new name when I took it over from the old chairman, and have lost the paperwork on every occasion. They even lost photocopies of mine and another person's passport page, talk about security concscious! So I can't even get money out at the counter because 'your signature isnt on file'. I also can't stop the statements being delivered to my old address under the old chairman's name, because they managed to change the address but not the name.

I also pursued the matter through FOS, saying that the charges had breached common law, and just keep getting letters every couple months from the FOS saying YB are refusing to co-operate in any way over the charges case. The fact I have no access to my account seems to have been dropped by the wayside. It is so incredibly frustrating.

I got a letter on the 11th December saying the FOS had asked the bank why it believes it has done nothing unlawful in behaving in the way it has. They told me the bank has submitted to them ' a large amount of documentation in support of it's argument which we now need to review in some depth. Given the complexity of the issues it is likely this will take some time, althought we will continue to keep you updated on matters as they happen.'
I phoned up to asked what they were doing about the access issues with the account and was told that this is dealt with by the banking department not the business banking department, and will probably not be resolved until the issues with charges are. They said they'd try and fast track the 'other issues' but I'm not holding my breath. More when I know it.

[100mel]

I've had exactly the same response - you would think if YB keep sending this raft of correspondence to the FOS on our complaints that they might actually get around to making a response to it

I'm up to 9 months on this complaint now and YB will neither justify or provide any breakdown of charges - they just keep saying that this is their right under terms and conditions etc

Mel