Derby Combined Court staying bank charge refund claims

[mightyman123]

I went to the Derby Combined Court to file against The Bank of Scotland and was told that the Court was staying claims.
I wrote a covering letter to the District Judge and submitted my claim with full supporting correspondence which I had sent to The Bank of Scotland which explained why my case should be dealt with now under hardship.
I met several of the hardship definitions and recomendations detailed by the FSO.
I had incurred over £500 of bank charges in the previous 12 months and been regularly overdarawn, facing repossession and having had a drop in income.
Despite of this the District Judge has chose to stay my claim.
I have also complained to the FSA that The Bank of Scotland are disregarding the hardship reccomendations and I will post the outcome of the separate complaint.
If the banks shut your bank account down when you complain or file in Court it is worth making a further complaint to the FSA as I recieved £250 from the Nationwide as compensation for doing this after the FSA upheld my complaint.

It is worth complaining of this as the banks have no right to punish you for reclaiming money that they have taken from an individuals bank account without permission.

	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.

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[MARTIN3030]

Welcome to the site.
Yes your points are valid and true.Unfortunately some courts are denying the claimant stay relief for hardship because they simple remain oblivious to the OFT waiver.
However where the defence ARE aware of your arguements and oppose the lifting or imposition of the stay-you should take this up with the reg bodies since they have a responsibility to comply with the OFT waiver agreements conditions.
The OFT waiver has no statute so its up to Judges.
Many Judges are saying that by definition harship could equally apply to anyone-since everyone has debts.
The problem it seems is the sketchy definition of what constitutes hardship.

Since you seem well aware of the process,thats some consolation in addressing it.

Insofar as compensation as a result of the Banks taking adverse action as a result of a complainants-yes its certainly a route available.
The revisions in the banking codes this year also set out guidelines about this,and although only voluntary this was prompted by the FSA and OFT who told them to do it themselves or be forced into it.

The good news is that there will be consultation in Westminister soon in which there are plans to have the banking codes regulated.
Will not be a day too soon.
Read about this here;

Watchdog muscles in on high street accounts | Money | The Guardian

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[kashfat]

Hi i just wrote to Barclays and actually got a letter from the CCCS to say i was under hardship, but they replied back saying they can give me counselling but no refund, any one help?

	Hardship By and large the "harship" provision in the FSA waiver is a myth which is intended to create a sense that the banking industry is sufficiently well-intentioned to act fairly towards its customers even though their right of access to the courts has been blocked. In fact there are very few guidelines as to procedure and very little definition of "hardship". One unfortunate spin off is that many people in difficulty get their hopes up and go to considerable lengths to plead hardship to their bank in order to get a refund or partial refund of their bank charges only to be refused. Neither the courts nor the FOS have the power to order a bank to make a charges refund on the basis of hardship. We hear of some people obtaining a partial refund quite easily. Others have obtained money by being very persistent - but mostly we hear that people are refused. Even benefits claimants do not automatically receive hardship refunds. By all means try to get a bank charges refund on the basis of hardship - but don't bank on it!

[MARTIN3030]

Suggest you take it up with the OFT Kashfat.
You obviously have it in writing.Assisting/help with managing finances is one such thing they are required to do where its apparent its needed.
Upholding the conditions set out in the Waiver agreement is a main one.Barclays were signed up to the original waiver,and of course the extension.
File a complaint with the OFT.

	FSA Waiver The FSA has granted a waiver to the finance industry in respect of bank charges claims. The waiver has been in place since July 2007 and will continue until the OFT test case is decided. The OFT test case will be heard by the House of Lords in June 2009. We are likley to get a decision before the end of the year. Under FSA rules, banks must normally deal with all complaints within 8 weeks. The FSA waiver has allowed banks to put bank charges claims on hold pending the outcome of the Test case. The FSA waiver is expremely one-sided as it allows banks to put claims on hold but it allows banks to continue levying charges. It also allows banks to continue enforcement action even in relation to disputed bank charges. The FSA waiver has been assisted by a general stay on charges-related County Court claims. You are still permitted to begin a County Court claim for the refund of your charges but your claim will be put on hold pending the outcome of the OFT test case. Despite this, we recommend very strongly that you begin a County Court claim now!! If you are on benefits, you will not have to pay court fees. You should start a County Court claim to recover your money straightaway.