Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
The 3 main parties all said payment should be swift and automatic if charges were ruled unfair. I can't help but wonder if that means they expected them to be ruled unfair, or if they were just trying to score points with voters, because of course we'll be having a general election this year, and for me the issue of bank charges should be right up there at the top of the agenda. We need to make sure it is.
We can all lobby our own MPs individually, writing letter, emailing, meeting them at their constituency surgeris, which are all good things to do. But we also need to get the media to pay more attention, which in turn will get all the candidates attention, and get them to tell us what they're going to do to stop the banks taking our money!
Demonstration, rally, poster campaign. Let's have your ideas and get bank charges on the agenda and in the media. The election will be within 6 months so we haven't got time to rest on our laurels.
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
Perhaps deal with the current claims in courts and get a success because until then, the banks' can crow on about how they won the test case in spite of the narrowness of the ruling. MP's responded to Martin Lewis prior to the conclusion of the OFT test case and their comments were based on the OFT winning the test case and that further litigation on fairness would have ultimately provided legal clarity. It did not happen that way so ultimately, the way you reverse the current picture is for someone, on any forum, to have a win in court with newer arguments.
Furthermore, when new arguments do emerge then we have to be able to explain that in plain and simple terms(Caro, I know you remember the days when you had to battle the banks rather than the roll over and die approach of the latter templated letters). The problem is, the battle was lost in the media just after the announcement of the OFT test case. I spent probably most of the end of last year dealing with prats on MSE who said that the banks won. In fact, the information ML has on the site is that there is low expectations of getting any money back. Until that issue is addressed then you and I face an uphill battle trying to convince people about that.
You're missing the point yourbank. The point is that if, and I mean IF, the law says that bank charges are fair then the law needs to be changed. It is governments that change laws, and it's the electorate that appoint Governments. If we wait around for new arguments to emerge and be tested, we will miss the opportunity to galvanise candidates of all parties to take up the gauntlet on behalf of bank customers, and it will probably be another 5 years before we have this opportunity again.
Not everyone can study the law, debate and discuss arguments etc, but everyone can campaign by all sorts of methods. You have been keen to mention discussions with the OFT, but it doesn't seem to have occurred to you that a group of people from various sites, including CAG and Penalty Charges in 2006, paved the way for them to appear to listen to consumers (for all the good it did). It was individuals, many thousands from this site that forced the OFT and the banks to try to resolve the issues in court even though they haven't succeeded - yet.
Just because the test case stopped any real progress in recent years does not mean that we can only fight this issue in one way. Wars can be fought on a number of different fronts, and now the test case is out of the way, we can move on and work on new strategies. I believe in people power, and between us I'm sure we can come up with a number of ways of achieving the outcome we're all seeking.
If you don't have a positive contribution to offer, then please do not dismiss those that do.
Don't forget Martin Lewis is in the media, and he hasn't lost interest.
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
You're missing the point yourbank. The point is that if, and I mean IF, the law says that bank charges are fair then the law needs to be changed. It is governments that change laws, and it's the electorate that appoint Governments. If we wait around for new arguments to emerge and be tested, we will miss the opportunity to galvanise candidates of all parties to take up the gauntlet on behalf of bank customers, and it will probably be another 5 years before we have this opportunity again.
"IF" means uncertainty which there still is and therefore the government cannot really legislate necessarily over the EC Directive from 1993 because the contract has to be fair to both the "seller" and the "buyer" so we can't simply legislate in the consumers favour simply because it might show bank charges to be fair. "IF" charges are fair then surely other issues are more important, ie economic stability, reduction in national debt, job creation, etc,etc.
Not everyone can study the law, debate and discuss arguments etc, but everyone can campaign by all sorts of methods. You have been keen to mention discussions with the OFT, but it doesn't seem to have occurred to you that a group of people from various sites, including CAG and Penalty Charges in 2006, paved the way for them to appear to listen to consumers (for all the good it did).
We can go back to 2006 if you want but have CAG as a site spoken to the OFT in December 2009 as Penalty Charges, MSE and LB have already done? That dialogue should continue at least for the first part of 2010. 4 years ago we were arguing penalties in law which is more or less out of the equation.
It was individuals, many thousands from this site that forced the OFT and the banks to try to resolve the issues in court even though they haven't succeeded - yet.
Furthermore, the media battle was being won by bank charges campaigners as well, so much so that everyone was reclaiming charges even if it had been just 1. However, since the SC judgement the media battle ie being lost.
Just because the test case stopped any real progress in recent years does not mean that we can only fight this issue in one way.
I think there has indeed be real progress since the OFT test case started. CAG being invited to have an active dialogue with the OFT is progress. The evidence presented in the OFT test case could ultimately back fire on them. RBS Group lowered their charges which is something they wouldn't have done before the OFT test case began.
Wars can be fought on a number of different fronts, and now the test case is out of the way, we can move on and work on new strategies. I believe in people power, and between us I'm sure we can come up with a number of ways of achieving the outcome we're all seeking.
Through dialogue yes, and by discussion of the way forward which is happening.
If you don't have a positive contribution to offer, then please do not dismiss those that do.
Caro, if you feel my contribution is negative then tell me how it is negative because I haven't rubbished your ideas and I haven't said anything negative about your post but stated what I have seen and what has to happen because we as campaigners are LOSING the media battle.
Don't forget Martin Lewis is in the media, and he hasn't lost interest.
Martin Lewis issuing a statement does give us necessarily a win in the media battle. Action rather than words speak louder. Remember, 1 win is all it will take to put wind back into the sails.
You're missing the point yourbank. The point is that if, and I mean IF, the law says that bank charges are fair then the law needs to be changed. It is governments that change laws, and it's the electorate that appoint Governments. If we wait around for new arguments to emerge and be tested, we will miss the opportunity to galvanise candidates of all parties to take up the gauntlet on behalf of bank customers, and it will probably be another 5 years before we have this opportunity again.
"IF" means uncertainty which there still is and therefore the government cannot really legislate necessarily over the EC Directive from 1993 because the contract has to be fair to both the "seller" and the "buyer" so we can't simply legislate in the consumers favour simply because it might show bank charges to be fair. "IF" charges are fair then surely other issues are more important, ie economic stability, reduction in national debt, job creation, etc,etc.
Not everyone can study the law, debate and discuss arguments etc, but everyone can campaign by all sorts of methods. You have been keen to mention discussions with the OFT, but it doesn't seem to have occurred to you that a group of people from various sites, including CAG and Penalty Charges in 2006, paved the way for them to appear to listen to consumers (for all the good it did).
We can go back to 2006 if you want but have CAG as a site spoken to the OFT in December 2009 as Penalty Charges, MSE and LB have already done? That dialogue should continue at least for the first part of 2010. 4 years ago we were arguing penalties in law which is more or less out of the equation.
It was individuals, many thousands from this site that forced the OFT and the banks to try to resolve the issues in court even though they haven't succeeded - yet.
Furthermore, the media battle was being won by bank charges campaigners as well, so much so that everyone was reclaiming charges even if it had been just 1. However, since the SC judgement the media battle ie being lost.
Just because the test case stopped any real progress in recent years does not mean that we can only fight this issue in one way.
I think there has indeed be real progress since the OFT test case started. CAG being invited to have an active dialogue with the OFT is progress. The evidence presented in the OFT test case could ultimately back fire on them. RBS Group lowered their charges which is something they wouldn't have done before the OFT test case began.
Wars can be fought on a number of different fronts, and now the test case is out of the way, we can move on and work on new strategies. I believe in people power, and between us I'm sure we can come up with a number of ways of achieving the outcome we're all seeking.
Through dialogue yes, and by discussion of the way forward which is happening.
If you don't have a positive contribution to offer, then please do not dismiss those that do.
Caro, if you feel my contribution is negative then tell me how it is negative because I haven't rubbished your ideas and I haven't said anything negative about your post but stated what I have seen and what has to happen because we as campaigners are LOSING the media battle.
Don't forget Martin Lewis is in the media, and he hasn't lost interest.
Martin Lewis issuing a statement does give us necessarily a win in the media battle. Action rather than words speak louder. Remember, 1 win is all it will take to put wind back into the sails. Today 10:59
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
Caro, Im with you all the way, I beleive we should lobby MP's as you said everyone of them agreed that the charges were unfair. If we work quickley we could affect the outcome of who is elected next.
It's a pity we don,t have someone like Joanne Lumbley behind us.
It we all stick together we can change things to our advantage.
Lobby Lobby and Lobby. Media Media Media, keep talking about it keep on at the banks, lets stand up for our rights and I for one am fed up to the back teeth of the "establishment " they are all in the old boys network, and just one day they will fall quicker than they rose in their ranks. Remeber those on the way up, because on the way down they won't want to know you.
Lynn
You're missing the point yourbank. The point is that if, and I mean IF, the law says that bank charges are fair then the law needs to be changed. It is governments that change laws, and it's the electorate that appoint Governments. If we wait around for new arguments to emerge and be tested, we will miss the opportunity to galvanise candidates of all parties to take up the gauntlet on behalf of bank customers, and it will probably be another 5 years before we have this opportunity again. "IF" means uncertainty which there still is and therefore the government cannot really legislate necessarily over the EC Directive from 1993 because the contract has to be fair to both the "seller" and the "buyer" so we can't simply legislate in the consumers favour simply because it might show bank charges to be fair. "IF" charges are fair then surely other issues are more important, ie economic stability, reduction in national debt, job creation, etc,etc.
Few things in life are certain, but if European legislation is not in the national interest then a member state does not have to comply with it, and there are circumstances where national legislation takes priority over European. I don't see the point in arguing that other issues are importand if bank charges are fair, because we both agree (I think) that they aren't.
Not everyone can study the law, debate and discuss arguments etc, but everyone can campaign by all sorts of methods. You have been keen to mention discussions with the OFT, but it doesn't seem to have occurred to you that a group of people from various sites, including CAG and Penalty Charges in 2006, paved the way for them to appear to listen to consumers (for all the good it did). We can go back to 2006 if you want but have CAG as a site spoken to the OFT in December 2009 as Penalty Charges, MSE and LB have already done? That dialogue should continue at least for the first part of 2010. 4 years ago we were arguing penalties in law which is more or less out of the equation.
You mean the OFT failed to appeal over the issue of penalties in a case where the banks appealed the decisions that went against them. I can't comment on the responses from the higher echelons of CAG to the OFT, but given the 2 and a half years they've held up the campaign to date, I won't hold my breath.
It was individuals, many thousands from this site that forced the OFT and the banks to try to resolve the issues in court even though they haven't succeeded - yet. Furthermore, the media battle was being won by bank charges campaigners as well, so much so that everyone was reclaiming charges even if it had been just 1. However, since the SC judgement the media battle ie being lost.
Which is precisely why we need to turn it around.
Just because the test case stopped any real progress in recent years does not mean that we can only fight this issue in one way. I think there has indeed be real progress since the OFT test case started. CAG being invited to have an active dialogue with the OFT is progress. The evidence presented in the OFT test case could ultimately back fire on them. RBS Group lowered their charges which is something they wouldn't have done before the OFT test case began.
I find this bit confusing. Whose evidence could backfire on who? Doesn't the fact that the RBS have apparently lowered charges, and indeed that most other banks have changed them, suggest to you that there was something wrong with them in the first place?
Wars can be fought on a number of different fronts, and now the test case is out of the way, we can move on and work on new strategies. I believe in people power, and between us I'm sure we can come up with a number of ways of achieving the outcome we're all seeking. Through dialogue yes, and by discussion of the way forward which is happening.
Dialogue, lobbying, peaceful action and whatever legal means are at our disposal. We've seen the effect of relying entirely on one action.
If you don't have a positive contribution to offer, then please do not dismiss those that do. Caro, if you feel my contribution is negative then tell me how it is negative because I haven't rubbished your ideas and I haven't said anything negative about your post but stated what I have seen and what has to happen because we as campaigners are LOSING the media battle.
As I have said, that is why we need to remedy this. You have posted on numerous other threads what you've seen and what you think, now I for one am providing another option.
Don't forget Martin Lewis is in the media, and he hasn't lost interest.
Martin Lewis issuing a statement does give us necessarily a win in the media battle. Action rather than words speak louder. Remember, 1 win is all it will take to put wind back into the sails.
I agree entirely on your last point, but in all honesty this is likely to take some time yet, so in the meantime I see no problem with being proactive.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss how to campaign and lobby effectively, and prove to parliament, the banks and the OFT that the Great British public will not roll over and give up. Not everyone in the campaign has the ear of the OFT, and make their representations in other ways.
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
Well, I think we should have a demonstration. I know that everyone on my 'Another suicide,,,' thread would be up for it, and I'm sorry I haven't been active on that for a few weeks due to having to deal with a court case.
I also know a number of people who are not on CAG who would certainly be willing to demonstrate.
Our idea on the other thread was to demonstrate about bank charges, including the bl**dy reserve fee, but also about late payment charges from British Gas and other organizations too. You can't pay your bill because you simply don't have the money, so you get penalised and owe more money. You can't do your bills by direct debit because the money may not be in your account, so you get charged £3.50 or more for not using direct debit. Obviously if you set up a direct debit and there is no money to pay it the bank returns it and you get charged by the bank and the organization too.
The bank charges are a major issue, but so are all these other issues too. If we are going to have a demonstration, can we include all these other issues too? They are all contributing to the reasons so many of us are in such a horrible mess.
I think it really depends on what form the action takes DD and where it is targetted, but I agree that other charges are an issue too and need addressing.
The problem is that there are so many issues that need dealing with that I'm not sure that dealing with everything together would work.
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
I agree entirely on your last point, but in all honesty this is likely to take some time yet, so in the meantime I see no problem with being proactive.
Have you guys not been proactive since November 25th? Sorry to pick up on this but discussions have been going forward since then all over the place so I am not sure why CAG is the last to look at this.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss how to campaign and lobby effectively, and prove to parliament, the banks and the OFT that the Great British public will not roll over and give up. Not everyone in the campaign has the ear of the OFT, and make their representations in other ways.
Vince Cable tabled an Early Day Motion 283 on 30th November 2009 of which there was just 70 signatures on it(the story appeared on MSE but not sure it achieved that much coverage here) UK Parliament - Early Day Motions By Details
Can I ask what lobbying is intending to achieve?
With newer advice coming out in 3 weeks. is that not saying something about how the campaign will proceed?
At the moment, there is a lot of words but ACTIONS is what will help. CAG now has the ear of the OFT as a campaign group. They chose not to attend in person in December but arrange for a conference call. They are still party to the further talks with the OFT during 2010.
If you are demonstrating as I read the post below this one, can I ask who or what or where is the demonstration happening?
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
I agree entirely on your last point, but in all honesty this is likely to take some time yet, so in the meantime I see no problem with being proactive.
Have you guys not been proactive since November 25th? Sorry to pick up on this but discussions have been going forward since then all over the place so I am not sure why CAG is the last to look at this.
Not sure who you mean by "you guys", but I don't recall saying that CAG weren't being proactive.
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
There wasn't much point in doing anything in the Silly Season for obvious reasons.
I think it's a question of whether we put all the complaints together, including DCA behaviour too, which ties in with the conduct of the banks and other institutions chasing for money.
well im in for some peacefull demo and hit where it will get the most publicity right outside downing st it is time to let them know we have had enough
First news story on bank charges in 2010. It paints a far more negative picture than I could ever do
Exactly why we need to show the media we're still in there fighting, and the banks haven't got rid of us yet.
Originally Posted by bach
Caro, Im with you all the way, I beleive we should lobby MP's as you said everyone of them agreed that the charges were unfair. If we work quickley we could affect the outcome of who is elected next.
It's a pity we don,t have someone like Joanne Lumbley behind us.
It we all stick together we can change things to our advantage.
Lobby Lobby and Lobby. Media Media Media, keep talking about it keep on at the banks, lets stand up for our rights and I for one am fed up to the back teeth of the "establishment " they are all in the old boys network, and just one day they will fall quicker than they rose in their ranks. Remeber those on the way up, because on the way down they won't want to know you.
Lynn
Thanks for the support Lynn
Originally Posted by yourbank
Vince Cable tabled an Early Day Motion 283 on 30th November 2009 of which there was just 70 signatures on it(the story appeared on MSE but not sure it achieved that much coverage here) UK Parliament - Early Day Motions By Details
Can I ask what lobbying is intending to achieve?
With newer advice coming out in 3 weeks. is that not saying something about how the campaign will proceed?
At the moment, there is a lot of words but ACTIONS is what will help. CAG now has the ear of the OFT as a campaign group. They chose not to attend in person in December but arrange for a conference call. They are still party to the further talks with the OFT during 2010.
If you are demonstrating as I read the post below this one, can I ask who or what or where is the demonstration happening?
Lobbying is the practice of influencing decisions made by government.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss what is likely to be the most effective course of action, and a demonstration could be a possibility.
Joanna Lumley is an excellent example of a celebrity with a conscience who has made a difference, and Vanessa Redgrave is another.
When the Liberals and Conservatives were in opposition they both agreed that banks should pay back high bank charges to customers. Nothing seems to of happened since they came into power as a coalition. PPI insurance has been sorted now they should turn their attention to bank charges and help customers get exorbitant charges refunded.
Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.
Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007
Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06
Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007
Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.
What decisions do you want to influence ? Effective course of action to acheive what ?
If historicals then fine, and we need to work on the legal aspects too
If future of banking, then fine again, but you can also help influence the future of banking by involving yourselves and Caggers in the work of the OFT and the implementation and monitoring groups.
Bank Charges Campaign Continues
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by caro
