V-E Day: Victory over Egg

[Mistermind]

Claimants 117 - Egg 2

O...........Chelsea Flower Show 19-23 May 2009

Roll of Honour

26 weeks - 21 NOV 2006 - barcote (judgment in Oxford court) - Success! Judgement AGAINST Egg...

?? weeks - 23 NOV 2006 - Maroonfox5 V Egg........ " Won"

38 weeks - 05 DEC. 2006 – Yasmin (in court, PPI ongoing) - Egg_Charges and Default

?? weeks - 20 DEC. 2006 - Admanbo80 - Has anyone else had Egg file a defense? (1 2)

14 weeks - 21 DEC. 2006 - Jonnie Reclaim - Has anyone else had Egg file a defense? (1 2)

?? weeks - 21 DEC. 2006- Blackcatchillers v Egg .........WON

?? weeks - 22 DEC. 2006 – Joa - Wind of change- Egg the stinker gets a legal makeover

09 weeks - 28 DEC. 2006 – waynedear - Naughty Egg!! (1 2 3 4)

?? weeks - 28 DEC. 2006 – Sassylass - WON "Egg"

?? weeks - 28 DEC. 2006 - Fergal71 - WON "Egg"

26 weeks - 13 JAN. 2007 - KAZZAW v EGG ***WON*** (1 2)

15 weeks - 13 JAN. 2007 - kateandpete v Egg**WON WITHOUT CONFIDENTIALITY**

11 weeks - 18 JAN. 2007 - Schnide vs Egg

39 weeks - 01 FEB. 2007 – Mcuth - WON "Egg"

08 weeks - 02 FEB. 2007 – Westwell - Faz V Egg **WON**

03 weeks - 10 FEB. 2007 - Benham3160 - Benham vs. Egg

08 weeks - 15 FEB. 2007 - Livelylad v Egg

31 weeks - 19 FEB. 2007 - Oddfellow vs Egg - No waiver of monthly repayment

02 weeks - 25 FEB. 2007 - Banofi v Egg

?? weeks - 26 FEB. 2007 - Empire strikes back v Egg Card Repayment Insurance.

07 weeks - 28 FEB. 2007 - THFC4EVER v Egg**WON**

05 weeks - 07 MAR 2007 - 831badger - Egg **won**

03 weeks - 20 MAR 2007 – Animaleyes - tinks v egg

11 weeks - 24 MAR 2007 - Maxine989 (16.9% C.I.) - The Egg Battle is *** WON ***

?? weeks - 28 MAR 2007 - Abby vs Egg

?? weeks - 29 MAR 2007 –PPI ongoing - UPDATE: pturner and EGG Card PPI

30 weeks - 02 APR 2007 - fe_dup_1 vs Egg

?? weeks - 07 APR 2007 - Petmidget (C.I.) - V-E Day: Victory over Egg3

03 weeks - 12 APR 2007 - elisedriver - Pollard Vs Egg

05 weeks - 14 APR 2007 - daipp v Egg

03 weeks - 14 APR 2007 - Sparks v EGG **WON**

06 weeks - 17 APR 2007 - Smiley Scouser 27 V Egg

02 weeks - 19 APR 2007 - Indyfox99 v egg NEED HELP

03 weeks - 20 APR 2007 - represent1 -Indyfox99 v egg NEED HELP

?? weeks - 22 APR 2007 - Lisa1977 V Egg...!!!!Won !!!!

54 weeks - 23 APR 2007 - in court: DN, PPI ongoing - Angry Cat v Egg** Egg smashed at last**

03 weeks - 24 APR 2007 - grant289 vs Egg (scotland)

08 weeks - 25 APR 2007 - SIFLY Vs EGG

04 weeks - 25 APR 2007 - andrewjb - ajbajb vs Egg

04 weeks - 26 APR 2007 - scuzziemoo (+ unrequested interest) - Horwood Vs Egg Card

01 weeks - 30 APR 2007 - WINNING TEMPLATE LETTER - Eggmail then 2-day payout - moc1982 v Egg

11 weeks - 02 MAY 2007 - Eggmail then 1-day payout - IrishRose v Egg

03 weeks - 05 MAY 2007 - Munchkin0110 - Me v Egg

30 weeks - 07 MAY 20007 - un1boy vs egg.

03 weeks - 22 MAY 2007 - consumerpower - Looking for a buddy to help me through Egg bank claim , Looking for a buddy to help me through Egg bank claim - OFFER RECIEVED TODAY

04 weeks - 23 MAY 2007 - AFCChris V Egg - WON

09 weeks - 23 MAY 2007- Glennyboy v Egg

02 weeks - 02 JUN 2007 - auntiefi -egg were easy!

09 weeks - 06 JUN 2007 - one charge only - rivig v egg :P

20 weeks - 06 JUN 2007 - Didge v Egg (12)

04 weeks - 09 JUN 2007 - Tommysjunk vs Egg/Nationwide

04 weeks - 14 JUN 2007 - Yode v Egg

04 weeks - 19 JUN 2007 - chardonnay v's egg 'won'

?? weeks - Ginger66 - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/944-egg_charges-default-12.html#post929693

06 weeks - 04 JUL 2007 - Mistermind v Egg

03 weeks - 04 JUL 2007 - shanksy - Easy Win Against Egg

16 weeks - 21 JUL 2007 - dour1830 - Fat Controller v Egg

?? weeks - 05 AUG 2007 - Vampyra -v- Barclays & Egg ****WON****

?? weeks - 05 AUG 2007 - rosie&jim v egg

17 weeks - 05 AUG 2007 - sallysas - sally v egg

?? weeks - 06 AUG 2007 - Ginger-Bones vs Egg

?? weeks - 08 AUG 2007 - mr.sshh vs. EGG plc

19 weeks - 17 AUG 2007 - A very cross Puddinpie V Egg, & Phgatram v EGG (2)

?? weeks - 22 AUG 2007 - JULI99 - won charges reclaim before court - Scrambled Egg (1 2)

08 weeks - 30 AUG 2007 - spring6 v egg

80 weeks - 21 SEP 2007 - Yasmin - Default Notice removed by court - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/944-egg_charges-default-13.html?highlight=yasmin

?? weeks - 29 SEP 2007 - r710 V Egg **WON**

15 weeks - 02 OCT 2007 - BlueWillow v Egg - **WON**

18 weeks - 15 OCT 2007 - quick refund after threat of FOS - MadMaxCTR V Egg ***WON***

06 weeks - 16 OCT 2007 - xpuser Vs Egg

23 weeks - 25 OCT 2007 - Phatram v EGG Phatram v EGG **WON

10 weeks - 28 OCT 2007 - Mrsc - Egg/Trevor Munn/ARC Europe 'WON'

01 weeks - 09 NOV 2007 - Tednol - Ted v Egg

05 weeks - 17 NOV 2007 - Skins V Egg **WON**

42 weeks - 27 NOV 2007 - kriso v Egg

20 weeks - 29 NOV 2007 - Yep! I'm another Egghead.

?? weeks - 29 NOV 2007 - DN removal continuing - cmdenny - EGG Defaulting on closed Account!

?? weeks - 29 DEC 2007 - papadak - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/123743-egg-defending-court-proceedings.html#post1303 630

05 weeks - 17 JAN 2008 - Oggy1 - egg defending court proceedings

03 weeks - 22 JAN 2008 - WINNING TEMPLATE LETTER - andrew_nwide - WON!! Egg Smashed £900

01 weeks - 23 JAN 2008 - fivelaws v Egg ***WON***

20 weeks - 01 MAR 2008 - Alex the Lad v. Egg

01 weeks - 18 MAR 2008 - fitzos, £32 refunded in 5 days - fitz vs egg **WON**

02 weeks - 22 MAR 2008 - SteveH2508 v Egg

05 weeks - 18 APR 2008 - phatram - Mrs P V Egg 2 ***WON***

?? weeks - 23 APR 2008 - poochball -v- egg ***DEFAULT REMOVED***

08 weeks - 14 MAY 2008 - bunty76 - Won by default - how do i progress?

59 weeks - 22 MAY 2008 - paulrockliffe with interest - Rocky vs Egg

02 weeks - 22 MAY 2008 - with interest - Jackanory Vs Egg ***WON***

07 weeks - 22 MAY 2008 - penalty charges refunded, PPI reclaim ongoing - tal vs Egg............ Reclaiming - Egg Credit Card Protector Charges

02 weeks - 30 MAY 2008 - finestm - Paying through arrangement, should I reclaim charges?

09 weeks - 22 JUL 2008 - Moobelle vs Egg

09 weeks - 26 JUL 2008 - mikek vs closed EGG card **WON**

04 weeks - 17 AUG 2008 - charges + 8% - jellybabe vs Egg Card (closed acct)

11 weeks - 07 SEP 2008 - Penny v Egg

02 weeks - 18 SEP 2008 - Rooftopgambler vs Egg

01 weeks - 12 NOV 2008 - pb's wife v egg

06 weeks - 11 JAN 2009 - papadak - EGG serves a Tomlin - What happens now

?? weeks - 31 JAN 2009 - charges refunded by Egg without even Subject Access Request or itemised reclaim submission - the Main Man - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/173467-viscount-stair-egg-loan.html#post1953565

122 weeks - 04 FEB 2009 - unjustified DN on Egg Loan Account rolled back by Egg after an heroic two and a half years tussle - Incipience - Egg Default

05 weeks - 06 AUG 2009 - woodwa5 v egg cc ***WON***

?? weeks - 10 AUG 2009 - Gazbolts73 - Loan insurance reclaimed - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/32603-successful-claims.html#post2354321

?? weeks - 02 SEP 2009 - bornrich - Final stages of Egg CC reclaim – won't send cheque

14 PPI battles won, 2 lost:

34 weeks - 25 APR 2007 - won PPI before court -Annalh v Egg/DLA/Eversheds ** Judgement given by court **

16 weeks - 19 JUN 2007 - won PPI in court - Empire strikes back v Egg Card Repayment Insurance.

08 weeks - 01 AUG 2007 -won PPI before court - Wednesday 1867 poss vs Egg ( 12)

49 weeks - 22 AUG 2007 - JULI99 - lost PPI in court - Scrambled Egg (12)

35 weeks - 07 JAN 2008 - phatram - won PPI, case stayed, stay lifted, Egg settled in full before court (was self-employed and never eligible) - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/87077-egg-credit-card-ppi-3.html#post1314773

72 weeks - 07 FEB 2009 - oggy1 – PPI refunded by Egg before court because CCA shows no evidence of cardholder consent- ppi against egg --wont repay!!

01 weeks - 01 AUG 2009 - PPI refunded with interest - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/212600-shedsounds-egg-quick-win.html

?? weeks - 06 AUG 2009 - alsindebt - PPI refunded - Thanks to CAG

08 weeks - 02 SEP 2009 - fireyjack - PPI refunded - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/32603-successful-claims.html#post2403402

113 weeks - 13 NOV 2009 - e_inspired - PPI satisfactory settlement with DN rolled back http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/113999-egg-dlc-final-straits-4.html#post2573214

01 week - 19 NOV 2009 - Militant Consumer's Friend v Egg Loans

00 week - 07 DEC 2009 - BSC - PPI refunded immediately on request - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/236975-egg-1-cc-1-a.html#post2629798

02 weeks - 19 DEC 2009 - baileyb00 - PPI refunded in full after one letter - Egg Charges - Can I claim PPI? ***WON*** (PPI)

01 weeks - 11 JAN 2010 - Declaraion - PPI refunded in full after one phone call - Egg Ppi

03 weeks - 21 JAN 2010 - rkm123 - PPI reclaim rejected by FOS - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/240971-egg-ppi-have-filed.html#post2716510

52 weeks - 23 JAN 2010 - full £1,100 refund of premiums for unrequested (unticked) PPI - http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/egg/164090-bathgatebuyer-egg-2.html

Blackpool Festival of Dance 21-29 May 2009
www.BlackpoolDanceFestival.co m

Egg winning threads in Forum - Other Institutions Successes,

Donate via Paypal to keep CAG alive -
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/websc...ngroup.c o.uk

Or to donate a cheque by post, send a Private Mail to "Dave" at -
http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/private.php?do=newpm&u=1

Glossary, letters, etc - All-in-one links, abbreviations, acronyms, terms

New advice from the Information Commissioner re Subject Access Request: http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/announcement.php?f=51&a=9 0

Irish banks levying only £3 penalty charge, in explicit Terms and Conditions –

http://www.accbank.ie/index.php?name=Fees+%26+C harges

http://www.aib.ie/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=RO IPersonalPortal/AIBContent_C/pp_guide&c=AIBContent_C&c id=1199721861976&channel= P004

[Mistermind]

Hi, without any prompting this thread has been promoted to a Sticky.
In case anyone wonders where the old thread has gone, it has gone here.

All the best to past, present and future comrades-in-arms in the V-E Day Parade.

[yode]

Another Smashed Egg - Offered To Settle In Full Today!! £550! See My Thread For Details But Egg Have Been Quick To Crack!!

[Mistermind]

Claimants 53 - Egg 0


"Sent first request: June 3rd 2007
Offered full settlement: June 14th 2007!!!!!!"

Very well done Yode, the latest of many happy bunnies -- 11 days from asked to given, amount in full without court.

Speaking as one who remembers the bitter wrestling Egg used to put up even 8 months ago, the reformed Egg now shows all other cards an enlightened example of reasonableness. Well done New Model Egg, credit where credit is due.

[yode]

Boy I am glad they were easy to crack - am battling on with nastywest....can't see the end of that yet! but egg gives hope that they will all realise that if they don't want to spill the beans they are going to have to stop wasting court time.

Thanks for your support - and information without which I would not have thought this possible!

[Mistermind]

Empire strikes back v Egg Card Repayment Insurance.

Good news. Happy to report my previous statistic that only Annalh won against Egg PPI missed out the above success on 19 June 2007 after a 16-week campaign.

The CAG engine is quirky. When I did an Advanced Search for "Egg" anywhere in the PPI Forum it failed to find a single occurrence, when in reality there were at least 10, but alas only one success reported. (30th September 2007 - I have since realised that on CAG as on many other forums the search engine cannot find short words like the three-letter word EGG).

A PPI **WON** Forum would give encouragement to claimants in this difficult battle.
Any chance, Mods?

Empire's was such a rare and significant victory that I have added his 19th June 2007 winning link from the PPI Forum into the V-E Day Roll of Honour (Empire the first claimant to score twice), so the latest score now reads:


Claimants 57 - Egg 0

[Mistermind]

OFT LAUNCH HIGH COURT TEST CASE 26th July 2007

JOINT RESPONSE TO OFT TEST CASE 31st July 2007

Sticky: OFT test case: What this means for you

Lloyds TSB - Answers to questions on bank charges


The decisive and binding test case which the OFT will launch in the High Court currently involves penalty charges by 93% of UK banks, not credit cards so far. In the same way this OFT initiative came suddenly out of the blue, a similar OFT initiative involving credit cards could not be ruled out. If the latter happens, then new credit card charge reclaims too could be held in abeyance until the test case reaches judgment.

The second thread above announced an official CAG and PenaltyCharges.com joint proposal that penalty charges be reduced to £5. Regardless of where the revised charge will finally be set, whether at £5 or whatever, Egg charges which currently are retrospectively refunded 100% would cease to be so -- instead of £20 refund it would become £15 refund, instead of £16 refund it would become £11 refund -- 30% less than now. If the final figure were set at £8, then the current £16 refund would be halved.

IF a looming pitch battle in the High Court becomes known to credit card firms, conceivably current Egg repayment policy could change. They could start stalling like other institutions, or they could lose their shyness about the Small Claims Court, and revert to fighting claimants in the Small Claims Court the way they did in 2006. In barcote's Oxford court case in November 2006 the judge ruled that £5 was the right amount, so claimants have nothing to gain by going to court.

With the future uncertain, the current easy-going Egg refund policy cannot be relied on to continue indefinitely. Anyone still to reclaim Egg charges and interest would be well advised to start the ball rolling yesterday.

The £10 full monty request will net an inch-thick bundle from Egg, but this can take 4 to 6 weeks. The £5 list of past penalty charges would come much faster, especially when requested via Secure Eggmail.

Good luck to all.

[Mistermind]

News of an epidemic of "stays" (trials postponed pending OFT test case outcome) is now sweeping through the bank reclaim forums.

If the OFT even hints at mounting a comparable test case against credit cards, "stays" can spread, putting ongoing claims into limbo, potentially for months. Should the loser appeal, potentially for years. Get reclaims done and dusted quick while the going is good.

[Mistermind]

BBC NEWS | Business | Banks still being sued over fees

Sticky: Find out here if your local court is staying claims ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page) ICY


Large numbers of reclaim cases already scheduled for court have already been stayed until February, March, April 2008 etc, and every day more courts join the bandwagon of stayed cases. Claimants who spent six painful months or a year wrestling obstructive banks into a court showdown, only to be consigned at the last minute to limbo without limit, are understandably distressed. Those who fought one bank at a time because that was all the aggro they could take, now find themselves overtaken by the tide of events.

Tom Brennan's case had a first hearing on 13th April 2007, with judgment issued on 30th July 2007, taking 3.5 months. On judgment day the OFT just happened to let it be known that their test case against banks should be heard "by the end of the year".

Considering that the outcome of perhaps £18 billion over 6 years retrospectively of unlawful charges for banks alone, not credit cards (plus interest), will hang on one High Court verdict, it would surprise no-one if teams of barristers for both sides will present truckloads of evidence in court. The judge may spend even longer to ponder his decision than in Brennan-v-NatWest. Just as Tom Brennan is known today to be appealing, both sides in the big showdown might appeal if they did not like the verdict, such staggering billions being at stake.

When will come the ultimate verdict beyond possibility of appeal? In the mean time, might the OFT announce a similar test case against credit cards, thus doubling the caseloads stayed?

Already a few courts have on their own initiative stayed a few cases of reclaims against credit cards -- without justification, and provoking a storm of protests from claimants, but it's hard to argue against judges. The present situation of 100% credit card refunds plus interest cannot get any better. It can get worse, and will. Sensing the turning tide, some card managements could change their policy, seeing that if they stall against 100% repayment now, they only need to repay less later, following a test case verdict pegging a non-zero lawful penalty charge at X pounds.

Whereas CAG and PenaltyCharges.co.uk have publicly proposed a lawful charge rate of £5, attention is drawn to the OFT pronouncement on 5th April 2006, when they set an intervention threshold of £12, and £16 in the case of Egg.

Anyone still to reclaim --
best to start yesterday.

[Mistermind]

Originally Posted by tifo

Blackburn court staying all claims, even credit card and business accounts.

They said as long as it says 'bank charges' on the POC it will get stayed.

Beware -- credit card reclaimants to avoid "bank charges" phrase at all times.

[Mistermind]

After a 30-day drought of good news, it seems Egg is still paying out in full before court paperwork: r710 V Egg **WON** .

As reported by another claimant, it appears an efficient Egg manager has been seconded to Manchester, and now a mounting pile of cases is receiving slower response.

[Cmdenny]

I was paid by Egg - full amount claimed. They are the most odious bank I have dealt with. They clsoed my Credit Card account bless em - but I had paid them off.

[Mistermind]

How time flies. This thread started as a gleam in the eye just over a year ago, and now 83 winners march in the Victory over Egg parade. Onto the century!

The OFT Test Case started in court on 16th January 2008, and is expected to last another two weeks. From the welter of daily reports anyone who would like a quick read from auntie BBC can click:

BBC NEWS | Business | OFT accuses banks over charges - latest Test Case report on 29JAN2008

Each of 7 banks and 1 building society has 2 days to make their case followed by an OFT rebuttal, then the OFT replies at the end.
Then the High Court retires to consider a verdict, possibly after an extended wait as in the case of Brennan vs NatWest.

The banks' order of batting so far:

RBS
Barclays
Nationwide B/S
........

Or read more threads in http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...t-case-updates

[Mistermind]

Last Updated: Friday, 8 February 2008, 13:41 GMT
BBC NEWS | Business | Judge mulls bank fees case ruling

Judge mulls bank fees case ruling


Mr Justice Andrew Smith may take months over his judgement

The judge hearing the High Court test case on bank charges said his eventual ruling should help resolve thousands of claims pending in the county courts.

But Mr Justice Andrew Smith, concluding on the 14th day of the hearing, said he had "no idea at all" when he would be able to deliver his judgement. "I have a great deal of work to do before I make my judgement," he said. The case has been staged to decide if bank overdraft charges can be regulated by consumer contract legislation.

Frozen claims
While the hearing has focused on existing terms and conditions that banks apply to their current accounts and overdraft charges, thousands of claims for the return of overdraft charges are still on hold in the county courts.
There is every indication that my findings will translate to the historic terms Mr Justice Andrew Smith

Most of these were originally lodged by bank customers who were complaining about their bank's previous terms and conditions. Many such claims were frozen last summer when the banks, the Office of Fair Trading, the Financial Services Authority, and the judiciary decided that a test case was need to resolve some of the legal issues involved. Mr Justice Smith said he hoped his eventual judgement would give some guidance to county court judges.

"There is every indication that my findings will translate to the historic terms," he said. "That could mean a decision on the historic terms in very short order - maybe within a month [of my decision]," he added.

Worried
The prospect of a decision that goes against them has always been worrying to the banks as it might jeopardise about £3.5bn a year that they currently derive from overdraft charges.

In court, several bank barristers expressed unease that Mr Justice Smith's eventual findings might leak out in the time between him circulating a draft ruling to the parties to the case, and handing down his final public decision.

"The key point is to ensure there is no breach of confidentiality on the draft judgement," said Mr Ali Malek for the Abbey bank. Mr Justice Smith said he was "deeply troubled" by such a scenario. He then decided that his draft judgement would be sent out only to a "very tight circle" of named lawyers for the OFT, seven banks and the Nationwide building society.

Earlier in the proceedings the barrister for Lloyds TSB, Mr Bankim Thanki QC, had expressed concern that once the judge's decision was known the banks would be inundated with calls from customers asking about their claims. He had asked that the draft judgement be circulated on a Friday to give his bank time to digest it over a weekend and to prepare to respond to its customers. Now, Mr Justice Smith has decided that he will probably give the parties to the case just 24 hours to respond to any typographical or factual errors.

----------------------------------------------------------------

"There is every indication that my findings will translate to the historic terms," he said. "That could mean a decision on the historic terms in very short order - maybe within a month [of my decision]," he added.

I presume that Mr Justice Andrew Smith is saying that possibly within a month of his verdict a decision will be made on retrospective refunds, whether for these to be processed individually on application, or for banks to automate blanket refunds.

Assuming no appeal to a higher court.

[Mistermind]

24APR2008 - bank charges test case verdict:

Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

BBC NEWS | Business | Banks lose overdraft charges case

THE JUDGEMENT http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...judgment.p df

[Mistermind]

Bank charges: how to pay less
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has won a test case to establish that bank charges for unauthorised overdrafts come under "unfair contract" rules designed to protect the public ..
Daily Telegraph

OFT wins right to probe bank charges
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has won the right to look at bank charges following a test case heard at the High Court. The court has ruled that charges imposed by banks for ...
MSN UK News

Go-ahead for bank charges challenge
Charges levied by banks for unauthorised overdrafts are subject to regulation by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) under "unfair contract" rules, the High Court has ruled. The ...
Ananova

Court clears OFT to probe bank charges
LONDON (Reuters) - The consumer affairs watchdog won a legal victory on Thursday, the first stage of a lengthy process that potentially paves the way for bank account holders to ...
MSN UK News

Slow progress on bank charges
Campaigners are cock-a-hoop that the OFT has been given a green light to rule that bank overdraft charges are unfair. However it is the end of the beginning, rather than the ...
BBC News

Court clears UK watchdog to probe bank charges
LONDON, April 24 (Reuters) - Britain's consumer affairs watchdog won a legal victory on Thursday, the first stage of a lengthy process that potentially paves the way for bank ...
Guardian Unlimited

OFT wins unfair bank charges case
People can be charged as much as £35 if they breach their overdraft limit, go overdrawn without first clearing it with their bank or bounce a payment, but it is thought the actual ...
This is Money

Out with the charges, in with the fees
As far as most people are concerned, the good guys have won the first skirmish in the great banking-charges battle. Yesterday's High Court ruling means that the pressure will now ...
EDP 24

Court Decides Bank Charges Unfair
The Office of Fair Trading has won its High Court claim that charges levied by banks for unauthorised overdrafts are unfair. The test case follows attempts by customers to reclaim ...
Ananova

Bank charges High Court ruling: Q&A
Today's High Court ruling on hefty overdraft charges has been hailed a consumer victory. But will it end the plight of many banking customers? The judge has ruled in favour of the ...
This is Money

Victory for consumers in bank charges test case
Britain's biggest banks today lost a landmark test case at the High Court over unauthorised overdraft charges. The case went to the High Court to decide if the Office of Fair ...
Times Online

Q&A: Bank charges test case
A High Court judge has ruled in favour of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in a crucial test case which could have widespread consequences for millions of banking customers in the ...
BBC Business

Banks Lose Overdraft Charges Case
The decision paves the way for another hearing in which the court will decide whether the charges are unfair and, if so, what they should be. It could result in banks and building ...
Sky.com

UK court clears watchdog to probe bank charges
LONDON, April 24 (Reuters) - Britain's consumer affairs watchdog won a legal victory on Thursday allowing it to press ahead with an investigation into bank charges. However, the ...
Guardian Unlimited

Consumer charges victory
THE Office of Fair Trading today struck the first blow for consumers over unauthorised bank charges. The High Court ruled that charges levied by banks for unauthorised overdrafts ...
The Sun

Decision leads to prospect of long legal fight
It is positive news for those who have racked up large sums of bank charges in recent years, but really just the first step in a potentially long and drawn-out legal battle. The ...
Financial Times

Banks told to stop stalling and pay up after verdict on charges
Banks have been accused of trying to block compensation claims from hundreds of thousands of customers, after they refused to accept the findings of a High Court test case on ...
Times Online

High Court ruling adds to banks' woes
The retail banking industry, already straining under the credit crunch and heavy projected write-downs, was dealt a potentially billion-pound blow yesterday by a long-awaited ...
Financial Times

David Prosser: Proof that the law is on customers' side
This is the moment Britain's banks have been dreading. For several years now, almost every current account provider in the land has been quietly settling claims for compensation ...
The Independent

Leading article: A victory for common sense – and for customers
A crucial battle has been won in the campaign for fair bank charges, and now it is surely only a matter of time before final victory in the war itself arrives. A High Court judge ...
The Independent

Banks lose test case on penalty fees for overdrafts
BRITAIN'S biggest banks have lost a court test case about overdraft charges, paving the way for lower fees and a resolution to thousands of outstanding claims from customers. A ...
Scotsman

Payback time: Banks ordered to refund £10bn to customers
Britain's biggest banks face payouts of more than £10bn after losing the right to charge current account holders as much as they like for unauthorised borrowing. The High Court ...
Belfast Telegraph

Customers in line for £1billion payout as banks lose key test case ...
Customers could be repaid more than £1billion after the High Court ruled that overdraft bank charges were 'unfair'. A judge at the High Court decided today that the fees are ...
Daily Mail

High court to reveal bank charge decision
The high court will today rule in a landmark test case over unfair bank charges. Mr Justice Andrew Smith will rule not on the validity of unauthorised overdraft charges, but ...
Shropshire Star

Judge rules on 'unfair' bank charges
CHARGES levied by banks for unauthorised overdrafts are subject to regulation by the Office of Fair Trading under "unfair contract" rules, the High Court ruled today. The decision ...
Edinburgh News

Refunding of bank overdraft charges moves a step closer
Thousands of bank customers moved a step closer to having their overdraft charges refunded yesterday after the High Court in London ruled that they are subject to official ...
Herald

OFT win over 'unfair' bank charges
It's a step towards lower bank charges as the Office of Fair Trading wins the right to decide if overdraft fees are unfair. Bridgid Nzekwu explains. The Office of Fair Trading has ...
Channel 4 News

Bank refunds
HBOS:... £122m
RBS:...... £119m
Barclays: £116m
HSBC:.... £115m

Bank charges battle gets the go-ahead

Charges levied by banks for unauthorised overdrafts are subject to regulation by the Office of Fair Trading under “unfair contract” rules, the High Court ruled today. The ...
Information Commissioner Wales

Editor's blog - Overdraft charges: Banks must act now
UK banks must act fast to end uncertainties over unauthorised overdraft charges after yesterday's ruling by the High Court and clear up the whole mess. Tales of a great victory for ...
MyFinances.co.uk

OFT wins right to test fairness of bank charges - how does it affect ...
The Office of Fair Trading has won a High Court test case over bank charges. It is a major step that could pave the way for millions of people to be reimbursed "rip off" charges ...
Daily Mirror

High Court allows watchdog to probe bank charges
LONDON: Britain’s consumer affairs watchdog won a legal victory yesterday in the first stage of a lengthy process that potentially paves the way for bank account holders to ...
Gulf Times

UPDATE 3-Court clears UK watchdog to probe bank charges
LONDON, April 24 (Reuters) - Britain's consumer affairs watchdog won a legal victory on Thursday in the first stage of a lengthy process that potentially paves the way for bank ...
Reuters

Court rules on bank charges for exceeding credit limits
LONDON - Bank charges for exceeding credit limits are subject to consumer protection rules, a court ruled Thursday. Justice Andrew Smith said his decision did not mean that the ...
CNBC

UK banks to be assessed over bank charges - High Court ruling UPDATE
(adds further comment and background detail) LONDON (Thomson Financial) - The fairness of High Street bank charges can be challenged, a High Court judge ruled today. But Justice ...
CNBC

The case lasted 14 days over January and February and legal fees have soared to an estimated 15 million pounds with nine QCs and around 60 barristers, solicitors and advisors. Who pays is yet to be decided.

U.K. court rules regulator can investigate bank charges: rpt
LONDON (Marketwitch) -- A U.K. court has ruled against the country's biggest bank's in a test case on overdraft charges, according to media reports. The High Court ruling found ...
Marketwitch

UK banks to be assessed over bank charges - High Court ruling
LONDON (Thomson Financial) - The fairness of High Street bank charges can be challenged, a High Court judge ruled today. But Justice Andrew Smith said it was for another day to ...
Forbes

UPDATE 1-UK court clears watchdog to probe bank charges
LONDON, April 24 (Reuters) - Britain's consumer affairs watchdog won a legal victory on Thursday allowing it to press ahead with an investigation into bank charges. However, the ...
Reuters

************************* ************************* ************************* *******************
Beware 6yo charges lapsing beyond reclaim

Lawyers say the test case could take years, as Thursday's ruling alone can go to the Appeal Court and the House of Lords before the full case goes to court -- and that could take two years or more. - Reuters report.

Crumbs. Yesterday's ruling empowering the OFT can go to appeal before 22 May 2008. Then subsequent trials to rule on OFT's fair price can also go to appeal. Owing to the credit crunch RBS-NatWest for one is writing down their assets by £7 billion and floating an unprecedented £12 billion rights issue, while UK's biggest mortgage lender HBOS at their AGM on 29 April 2008 is writing down £3 billion and floating a £4 billion rights issue. HBOS share price is down 42% in the past year, RBS down 46%, with UK banking sector overall down 26%. However, Lloyds TSB, Allied Irish Bank and Bank of Ireland have commendably sidestepped the subprime bad debt trap.

Royal Bank Of Scotland Share Chart. RBS Historical Graphs. Technical analysis for Royal Bank Of Scotland Group Plc Ord 25P.




Hbos Share Chart. HBOS Historical Graphs. Technical analysis for Hbos Plc Ord 25P.



Bloomberg.com: Worldwide -

HBOS management said at their AGM on 29 APR 2008:

Current turmoil in global financial markets introduces considerable uncertainty into the plans of all financial institutions. We are planning on the assumptions that conditions will remain uncertain throughout 2008.

HBOS bails out own fund as effect of credit crisis spreads - Times ...

The move came as the Bank of England disclosed that it had provided £314 million of emergency funding to a financial institution that it did not name, but which is understood to be Barclays.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/general/139528-50-billion-boe-rescue.html#post1494307

If UK banks bent double under their liquidity problems keep on appealing test case verdicts to buy time, and if the House of Lords or even the European Court does not pass the final verdict until say August 2010, then following said verdict any newly-lodged reclaims for charges refund could not be backdated earlier than August 2004 as per the 6-year Statute of Limitations. And if the final verdict should be delayed until 2011, double crumbs.....

Those who have unlawful charges reclaimable from 2002 but have committed nothing yet to legal paperwork, are seriously advised to safeguard their interests by putting down a marker for their backdated claims. Penalty charges have gone on unlawfully for decades, with all but the last 6 years beyond reclaim. 9 months have passed since July 2007 when the Test Case persuaded activists to become spectators. For those still watching and waiting to commence action, year 2000 and 2001 charges have already lapsed beyond reclaim, and 2002 charges have half gone. Best to discuss with CAG lawyers in the Test Case Forum -- if the banks appeal before May 22nd.

OFT Test Case: April 2008 - What the Judgment Means for You
OFT v Abbey and others April 2008 - what this means for you

OFT Test Case: April 2008 - Updated FAQ's
Bank Charges at April 2008 - draft work in progress

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/142775-bank-charges-april-2008-a.html?garpg=7

08 May 2008 - rise in non-penalty bank charges:
Banks boost current account fees in race to beat OFT cap - Times Online

************************* ************************* ***

An aside to Maxine: the press cuttings above came in one lump from Microsoft News.
I was a librarian in my previous incarnation -- as you know by now. .. ))

[maxine989]

Cor blimey you have been busy MM. I'm going to have a browse through now.

[Mistermind]

BBA – British Bankers' Association - Statement on permission to appeal



Bank charges: Banks confirm 'unfair charges' appeal | Money ...



Judge allows appeal over bank charges - International Herald Tribune



Judge allows appeal over bank charges | Reuters



The Judgment: Judge allowed appeal over bank charges - free press ...



Anger over bank charges ruling appeal - Times Online

However, consumers should still submit claims. David Kuo of fool.co.uk , the comparison website, said: “The law allows you to reclaim unfair charges plus interest that occurred in the past six years. As each day passes, it’s another day that you may not be able to claim for once the case is settled.

"Therefore, write to your bank to ask for the charges to be refunded. Follow up with a letter threatening court proceedings. Many courts will probably stay the majority of claims, but at least the six-year limitation on your claim will be halted.”

(echoing CAG's advice on not delaying)


Bank charges: banks to appeal decision | myfinances.co.uk



Delay in charges case as banks appeal | Bank charges case | This ...



The Judgment: Judge allowed appeal over bank charges - Free-Press ...



NewsNow: Bank Charges Test Case



Banking and credit | Bank charges | Bank charges



Banks appeal against unfair charges case



Banks postpone refunds for bank charge victims | Moneywise

David Black, banking expert at data provider Defaqto, says the European Commission could even be involved at some point: “The stakes for both sides are extremely high so this has all the hallmarks of
being a very lengthy judicial process. Next step is the Court of Appeal and after that the House of Lords and maybe even Europe.”

Court presses OFT to rule on bank charges - Business News ...

Having been urged to set a deadline for a decision, the OFT's legal representatives returned to court later in the day and said they would give the banking sector its verdict during the second week of July. If banks dispute the decision, the two sides pledged to return to court before Christmas to settle the question.
.....
Despite yesterday's commitments, customers may still face a long wait for compensation. Mr Justice Smith also gave the eight banks covered by test cases on borrowing charges leave to appeal last month's ruling. The appeal will be heard this autumn, but the case could drag on into next year if subsequent appeals by either side are launched in courts at different levels up to the House of Lords.
........
The OFT was also buoyed by the banks' decision to accept that verdicts in the test cases would be binding on previous terms and conditions on current accounts, as well as the detail in the cases under consideration.

In theory, the OFT could now come to a view about the compensation owed to customers only for the courts to rule the 1999 consumer contracts legislation does not give it the right to use its authority in this way. However, the OFT's pledge also means the regulator will be in a position to order compensation payments – assuming it deems charges unfair, as it has in the credit card sector – as soon as the courts give a final verdict on its jurisdiction.

Bank Charges Reclaiming News: Result in the High Court test case!...

Q. Where can I see the 24APR2008 judgement?
A. The full 450 paragraph judgement is on the Judiciary.gov website. The following is the conclusion:

449. As for the position at common law, I accept the banks’ submission that none of the terms which I have considered (the terms now generally used by the banks for personal current accounts other than basic accounts and also certain of the terms used until recently by Clydesdale and RBSG) could be unenforceable on the grounds that they are penal (paragraph 323 above).

450. With regard to the 1999 Regulations, I conclude that, of the terms now generally used by the banks for personal current accounts (other than basic accounts), those of HSBC, Lloyds TSB, Nationwide and RBSG are in plain intelligible language, and those of Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale and HBOS are largely in plain intelligible language but not so in certain specific and relatively minor respects (paragraph 293 above). However, I reject the banks’ contention that the Relevant Terms are exempt from assessment as to fairness under Regulation 6(2) of the 1999 Regulations (paragraph 421 above). This does not mean that the Relevant Terms are necessarily to be regarded as unfair under Regulation 5(1) or that they are not binding upon consumers under Regulation 8(1): those are not questions for me to decide in this judgment. For the reasons that I have explained, I decline to make any declaration as to the meaning and effect of the requirement of good faith in Regulation 5(1) of the 1999 Regulations (paragraph 448 above).

Q. If it's still on hold, why put in a reclaim now?
A. It’s important to get a marker in as soon as possible, and there are three distinct reasons for this…

i. Get in the queue
It’s estimated there are already over 750,000 with cases on hold, so when the floodgates do open, the further ahead you are in the queue, the sooner your claim will be processed.

ii. Things change
The law is a strange thing. At the moment there is a precedent binding on lower courts that ‘bank charges are covered by unfair contractual terms rules’. That is not under any doubt. Yet it is possible the banks could put in an appeal, and while its unlikely, there is always a chance the Court of Appeal could overturn this (and subsequently the House of Lords and even European Court could then overturn that).
Yet the fact appeals could change the law doesn’t impact what the law is right now. So hopefully, the hold will be lifted soon, and people may be able to try to reclaim again. Therefore, simply because there’s a tiny chance things may change, and the decision is currently in reclaimers favour…. get your claim in now.

iii. Claim back as far as possible
The statute of limitations says you can only make a court claim for six years' worth of charges in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, five in Scotland. Therefore, on the surface there’s a worry that if you don’t get your marker in sooner, and you’ve got old charges to reclaim, you will miss the opportunity.
Yet the regulator, the FSA, has said it ‘stopped the clock’ on 27 April 2007, when it first put the hold on reclaiming and that this has frozen any ‘time bars’. This doesn’t have any power in the court, but the banks have agreed not to complain about time limits if a case goes to court, and judges in England, Wales or Northern Ireland shouldn’t consider the issue unless the banks request it (it’s slightly different in Scotland as judges there can consider time issues themselves).

Yet as this situation has never happened before, we do not know how it will pan out in court. As such, while hopefully things will run smoothly and this won’t be an issue, for belt and braces safety, assume the clock is still ticking.

(again concurring with CAG's advice)


Banks set to appeal OFT charges ruling - 24 April 2008



The Telegraph - Banks will appeal 'rip-off' overdraft fee ruling ...

[Mistermind]

BBC NEWS | Business | OFT says bank charges are unfair

The main UK banks have been told by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) that their overdraft charges are probably unfair. The OFT's view is revealed in a confidential memo circulated among senior staff at RBS/NatWest. The regulator tells RBS it has "serious concerns" that its overdraft terms might be unfair to its customers.

In April, the High Court, in the first of a series of legal rulings, said the OFT had the right to scrutinise the fairness of the banks' current charges. In one of the biggest consumer revolts of modern times, hundreds of thousands of claims for the refund of bank charges were lodged by aggrieved bank customers in county courts up and down the country, and with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), in the course of 2006 and 2007. The customers complained they had unfairly been overcharged hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of pounds when falling into the red.

"Serious concerns"

The OFT wrote in the middle of August to all the banks whose terms and conditions it had been scrutinising. At that stage all it would say in public was that "at this stage, no bank's terms have been given a clean bill of health and all banks remain under investigation." "The purpose of the letters is to start a dialogue with each bank to enable us to reach final conclusions as to whether the terms are unfair, and to identify which issues may need to be resolved in court proceedings," the OFT said at the time.

The leaked RBS/NatWest memo makes it clear what the OFT really thinks.
''The OFT has written to the test case banks with its preliminary views on the fairness of administration charges terms," says the memo. "It has told RBS that it has "serious concerns" that the terms may be unfair. The memo states that "RBS is considering its response. This is a key step towards phase 2 of the test case, which is not due to start until early 2009''.

Nick Spooner, of the campaigning website Im an orange, said the OFT's view was inevitable. "The OFT would not have spent all this time investigating the issue if it did not believe the charges were unfair," he said. "But I believe the OFT should now make public the fact it thinks the charges are indeed unfair," he added.

Many hearings to come

The OFT has been investigating the fairness of these controversial bank charges since April 2006. But the growing deluge of court cases led, in July 2007, to the banking industry coming to a deal with the OFT, FOS and the Financial Services Authority (FSA). All current and new bank charge cases would be put on hold until the underlying legal issues had been thrashed out in the courts. That eventually led to the OFT's initial High Court victory in April. In an increasingly complicated set of litigation, there are at least four more High Court decisions to come, with more if there are any appeals.

• this autumn Mr Justice Andrew Smith will rule if the OFT can also scrutinise the fairness of the historic terms formerly used by banks for their overdraft charges in the past
• he will also rule if any historic bank terms are unfair penalties under common law, as well as potentially under the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regulations
• in October there will be an appeal by the banks against the OFT's initial High Court victory in April
• and in late 2008/early 2009, a High Court hearing is expected to start on the substantive issue of whether or not bank overdraft charges are unfair - in effect a challenge by the banks to an anticipated adverse ruling by the OFT.

Ray Cox, a leading banking QC, said: "If this opinion of the OFT is confirmed with regard to the current charging structure, it is difficult to see how the banks will be able to have a system resembling their current overdraft charges at all."

An RBS spokesman replied that the OFT's letter was just the start of the next phase of the ongoing litigation. "The OFT's conclusions will be tested by the court," he said.
After a parallel investigation into the operation of bank current accounts generally, also launched in April 2006, the OFT concluded last month that they were "not working well for consumers". It pointed out that overdraft charges generated an income of £2.6bn a year for UK banks, and that much of this money was "derived opaquely" from customers.

[Mistermind]

Big and fast PPI reclaim reported today.