OFT v Banks - **House of Lords Appeal 23rd June 2009**

[freakyleaky]

NEWS RELEASE FROM BOB EGERTON (BOB THE BANKBUSTER)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 11 January 2008

OFT/BANKS TEST CASE TO BE HELD IN SMALL ROOM - OFT SPOKESMAN "DID NOT REALISE" ROOM ONLY BIG ENOUGH FOR 6 MEMBERS OF PUBLIC

Next Wednesday 16 January, the OFT and Britain's high street banks are due to meet in a High Court battle which will decide whether or not the banks are operating an unlawful charging regime. The case is of great public interest as it could result in the banks having to repay £20 billion or more to about 10 million customers. It has now been revealed that the case will be heard in a room at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in Fleet Street and that there will be space for precisely 11 members of the press and the public. A spokesperson for the centre said that entry will be on a first come first served basis but that the space will be divided roughly equally between the press and the public; and passes will be issued separately for morning and afternoon sessions. This means that, at most, 6 members of the public will be able to attend and no-one will be able to attend a full day. It will be impossible, therefore, for any one person to obtain a complete picture of the proceedings. It will also mean that many newspaper and television/radio reporters will excluded.

A spokesperson for the OFT claimed today that he "did not realise that the room would only hold this number of people".

Bob Egerton, bank charges campaigner, said, "This case is a great embarrassment to the OFT. It has exposed the institutional weakness within the OFT where it is effective at curbing unlawful behaviour by small businesses, but it does not have the stomach for a fight against the big corporations like the banks. By holding the case in such a small room, no member of the public will be able to sit through the whole case; and much of Britain's media will be excluded. The OFT is no doubt hoping that the case will receive little press coverage and that it will all quietly fizzle out. However, I and the many other campaigners will ensure that this issue does not die. We will continue to fight the banks over this issue whatever the outcome of a meeting in a tiny room in London."


Rob Williamson, leader of the case team at the OFT
International Dispute Resolution Centre, who can confirm the details of the room, 020 7936 7000
IDRC - Dispute Resolution, Arbitration, Mediation & Conferencing Facilities


More news and proposed action to follow!

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

	Are you letting your bank keep your money Are you giving away thousands of pounds?? Many people aren't claiming all of the money they are entitled to when they make their bank charges claims. You have been forced to pay unfair bank charges. Have you forgotten that your bank has charged you inteest on those charges? If you are overdrawn and the bank owes you charges - then your overdraft is made up of charges - money which you bank owes you. Yet you are paying interest to the bank - on your own money!!! Follow this link to see the discussions on this. You might even double th size of your claim.

[jowalshy]

In order to bring to the attetion on the media about the unfairness of having limited space for public and press, Penfold has come up with an e-mail which needs to be sent by as many people to the press.

Originally Posted by Penfold92

Newspaper contact emails:

The Times - news@timesonline.co.uk

Sky - news@sky.com

The Sun - talkback@the-sun.co.uk

The Mirror - mirrornews@mirror.co.uk

The Telegraph - dtletters@telegraph.co.uk
Not sure that is right, but it is a correct email anyway…

The People - mailbox@mirror.co.uk

ITV - dutyoffice@itv.com

Something on the BBC website: BBC NEWS | Business | Key test for bank overdraft fees

Watchdog - watchdog@bbc.co.uk

That’s a start others can add on this thread…Do we want to do this straight away or wait until the Petition is online???

Prabs (Penfold)

Originally Posted by Penfold92

something like tjhis should be easy enough for everyone to send off...

Dear Sir or Madam,

I would like you to be aware of something that came to my attention yesterday that gives me great concern. It has come to my attention that even though this Court case was due to be heard at the High Court it is in fact being held at the International Dispute Resolution Centre in Fleet Street and that there will be space for precisely 11 members of the press and the public. A spokesperson for the centre said that entry will be on a first come first served basis but that the space will be divided roughly equally between the press and the public; and passes will be issued separately for morning and afternoon sessions. This means that, at most, 6 members of the public will be able to attend and no-one will be able to attend a full day. It will be impossible, therefore, for any one person to obtain a complete picture of the proceedings. It will also mean that many newspaper and television/radio reporters will excluded.

A spokesperson for the OFT claimed today that he "did not realise that the room would only hold this number of people".

As a Press Member with National Reach I hope you will investigate this matter further and publish your findings? It is important that we all ensure Justice will prevail. Since no one person or the media will get the full picture, will the public's interest will be upheld? Surely you appreciate that this matter concerns the majority of people in this Country and is a National Issue. There will be others emailing to express their concerns as we are all concerned that this could be construed as almost behind “closed doors” and therefore potentially not in the interest of the General Public.

Yours faithfully,

[vortex]

I think if the press read sites like Penalty Charges which is Stephen Hone's site they would have been aware of the change in venue on THURSDAY when he posted it on his site. Do you not visit other sites for information?

[jowalshy]

A link for discussion

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ase-moved.html

[Ladidi]

I cant believe they actually expect us to believe they did not know where this case was going to be held until the very last minute and also stating that not one person of the public or press will be able to verify the true picture of events from beginning to end due to the size of the room.

I believe this a stitch up! The banks have no intention of revealing anything and I for one dont believe the outcome is not going to be for good of the customers who have lost £££'s but for the good of the banks and institutions and alike.

What can I say, the ombudsman put out a "stay" on all cases when they could have should been heard and now we are not even going to get the true picture of events!!

We as a customer could have and should have had our chances in court and the banks should have been made to reveal their true costs incurred,
that this matter would have been resolved after all not one of the banks intended to argue their case and now they are behind closed doors with limited reporting details of the case.

Oh my how they are all rubbing their hands with glee!!!!!

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[Ladidi]

The BBC News website have made this interesting reading..

BBC NEWS | Business | Key test for bank overdraft fees

[tonycee]

Im surprised that anyboby is actually surprised.
Money talks at every level.
And with this cartel standing to lose so much, just lift up the edge of your carpet.

[chubbas dad]

smaks of ...............well some one is being paid off i fancy?????

[louise2U]

I'm just getting used to this site so have tried sending the letter to various media, just hope I've done it right.

[Kelvid123]

Thanks guys, I have just sent all mine off to the above newspaper links. If I think of anymore I will copy them in too. Fingers crossed something will happen in our favour.

[smutley]

emailed letter to all and sundry!

[SELV]

I would have thought that with the money that is involved in this case they could have used Wembley Stadium instead of a little room holding just 11 people at the I.D.R.C.........SELV....; )

[tonycee]

Originally Posted by SELV

with the money that is involved in this case

Thats the very reason that they have wangled this.
They REALLY dont want to go public.

Its an absolute disgrace, but not one that surprises me.

[koalaattack]

Emails have gone to everyone of those bar the Sun.

Thanks for the template and all of the addresses, hopefully it'll make a few people think about looking into it.

Cheers,

KA

[jonnyk]

is it me, or does this stink of corruption??

[jansus]

missed most of it but apparently Martin Lewis was doing a good job of bringing this to everyones attention ( well those who listen to radio two) by quite rightly having a good rant and rave about this

jan

[jowalshy]

The Office of Fair Trading: OFT test case delayed

[tonycee]

The Office of Fair Trading: OFT test case delayed

OH, What a surprise !!!!!!!!!!!!!
They have spent an estimated £1million each in preperation for this case.
Nothing like forward planning then.....

[vortex]

The trial Judge for the test case cannot be expected to force a jury into returning a verdict JUST because there is an OFT test case, that he has been given to handle, can he?

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

[tonycee]

Jury ?

This will all be concluded by men with a funny handshake.