Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


5 Neutral
  1. My case has been stayed since mid July 2007, it was only weeks away from being heard, and have been waiting very patiently for the outcome of the test case. But now unfortunately the main supplier of work i sub-contract to is just about to got into administration, and work has all but disappeared for me, in fact the last two weeks i haven't worked at all, on top of that they are paying me when they should or as much as they should be. The thing is i am a genuine case, i shouldn't have to try too hard to explain myself because its true. now i would like to apply for the stay to be lifted, but i get so bogged down when i try to get my head round it, and its so bloody hard to understand, i end up feeling more depressed than i already am. Trouble is i absolutely have to do something, the wolves are at the door, asking for their money which they have ever right to ask for (in all about £2000), but i can't pay them at the moment, but my claim was for £3500 even without interest, and right now the banks charging me for going overdrawn anyway. What can i do? Is there any sort of solicitor i could go and see to get some immediate help that wouldn't ask for costs until after the case?
  2. I wonder how the banks would be affected if they just returned ALL the bank charges they have charged customers for the past 6 years tommorrow? How would that affect the countries banks? We all assume they have so much money it wouldn't make a dent in their pockets. But is that correct? We are talking about a vast sum of money here. Damage limitation i think is one of the key factors here, for the benefit of the country perhaps.
  3. Agreed, but i think we should see how this waiver thing pans out, the next few weeks should tell.
  4. 90% of the UK banks are involved in this test case and the other 10% have agreed to stand by the outcome. The banks, FSA and the OFT are fully aware that for the banks to make up for lost revenue by not charging its customers unauthorised overdraft charges they need time. Time to implement new charges, make its money in other ways. The OFT know the banks are in the wrong, but they can't expect the banks to just hold their hands up and stop charging people overnight without having something else in place to recoup their lost revenue. So don't expect too many supprises, the FSA have the ability to lift the waiver, but that is only if it feels the 90% of the banks are taking too much time getting this resolved. All the players in this case are already aware of the outcome, this is simply the best way to resolve it. When you think about it, it all makes sense. How else could you expect this whole situation to be resolved once and for all? Thats my simple view
  5. Absolutely, for me this the begining of the end for bank charges. By the time the outcome of this test case is known, bank charges as we know them today will be history. I have a claim due in court on the 19th October in the London Merchantile Court, and i hope it won't be stayed. But I don't think it will. Its all very inconvienient for us individuals, but collectively all very nessecary.
  6. Exactly, that is what i am saying. I am with Barclays and they have been charging me for my account for years now. But we are all talking about this as though the banks haven't even thought about losing. The current general view is that there is more chance of the banks losing this than winning. So why are they deciding to go to court? What can they gain? Well 2 years for an outcome, after the appeals etc. Lots of people deciding not to claim anymore. And more importantly they have 2 years to implement their new ways of banking. They must have the view by now that this thing is just not going to go away by itself, so this is a cunning plan by them to buy them time, stop so many people claiming, and sort this situation out once and for all. Just my simple view on this.
  7. I posted this a while ago, and thought i would repost here again now. The truth is that no one is certain of the outcome of this test case, and do we all really believe the banks are "BANKING" on the outcome of this case going their way? I personally don't think they are.
  8. Just thought i'd repost this to get some of your views.
  9. Im talking about people who haven't yet made a claim really, and could be thinking otherwise, because i bet there are a few of them. Unfortunately, we have just got to chew the fat for a while, well quite a while in actual fact.
  10. With referrence to my post no.359 in this topic. The more i think about it the more i am certain the banks probably don't even expect to win this case. This is just a great way for them to implement their new terms. They know they haven't got a leg to stand on regarding this, because if they did they would have gone to court a long time ago, and saved themselves a great deal of money. So for everybody not making a claim yet, don't delay, claim today. The banks are in the wrong and they know it, they know they will never win this test case, and they are using it as a delay tactic to bring in their new terms and also hoping that this test case news will stop many people from claiming their money back. So don't let them get away with it.
  11. I think we should be looking at the bigger picture. If they were found to be unfairly charging customers by the court, and the test case proved to be a precedent for all subsequent claims, then the banks would have to stop charging customers immediately. So how would they then make the money lost through not charging customers unauthorised overdraft fees etc? I believe this is a carefully planned tactic by the banks to give them plenty of time to implement new ways of banking, charging customers in other ways to make up the lost revenue in not charging unauthorised overdraft charges etc. So the outcome of this case really does not matter to them, maybe a slightly better outcome if they win, but regardless of that i believe we will ALL be banking under new terms and conditions with these banks in 2 years time. Banks are smartarses, and i don't believe for one second they are not doing this without having a carefully thought about PLAN B. They never put all their eggs in one basket.
  12. My case was heard at the London Merchantile Court on the 20th July 2007, the judge asked if Barclays bank intended to defend any or all of the 18 cases against it for that day. The bank then replied it did intend to defend all 18 cases, so Judge Mackie CBE Q.C then said that all 18 cases would be heard the same day in court on the 19th October 2007. In light of these recent develpoments, does this mean that my case and the 17 others will be stayed untill the test case is resolved? Or will mny case ever get to court, because i have little hope right now.
  13. Right, heres what happened. This relates just for the Barclays Bank claimants only. The judge, asked Barclays solicitor if any of the 18 unresolved claims for return of bank charges would be settled? Or does the bank intend to defend the claims in court? Their solicitor couldn't answer this question at all, the judge made it very clear to their solicitor that if they chose to defend the cases but then later settled just before the court date he would not be very happy at all and would be seeking costs for wasting the courts time. The solicitor then had to go and contact his client (Barclays) and ask them what they wanted to do. Unfortunately for all of us, he came back and replied that the bank intends to defend all 18 of the cases against it. The judge then said that all of the 18 cases could be heard on the same day, and that day being the Friday 19th October 2007. I couldn't understand why the bank decided to do this, and just presumed that it wanted to just delay repaying the charges as long as possible. But now in light of the recent events, it has all become ever so clear. Whilst this test case is being heard the bank is obviously going to apply for a stay, and then the case will be on hold for the test case to be heard. So they knew something that we all didn't it would appear. Life sucks. Forgive me if some of the terminology isn't correct, i hope that anyone who reads this understands what im saying. Life really sucks.
  • Create New...