Hi Pompey, Thanks for the reply. I have all the statements from 2004 but the PPI started to be applied in 2002. After sending two letters the bank have said that they will not refund a penny despite being self employed at the time the policy was taken out, in addition to other reasons why I believe the policy was mis-sold. I am now just about to register an official complaint with the Financial Ombudsman Service and will ask for a refund starting from when the policy was applied. As I don't have the statements from 2002-2004 does it matter? Thanks for your help. TheyrCriminals

Hi, Can I please ask how many years can you go back with reclaiming PPI on a credit card, is the general answer the usual 6 years or can you go back further? Thanks, TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, Can anyone provide us with an update yet as to how many bank charges claims are being successfully struck out by the banks or are the majority being allowed to amend their PoC's to incorporate the Supreme Court judgement and progress to trial? TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, Can anyone provide us with an update yet as to how many bank charges claims are being successfully struck out by the banks or are the majority being allowed to amend their PoC's to incorporate the Supreme Court judgement and progress to trial? TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, Thank you all very much for the above posts it has certainly given us a renewed hope. We did not attend the hearing and we now believe this probably played a significant part in the striking out of the claim. Still awaiting the written Order. TheyrCriminals

Hi, We phoned the court to find out the result but as yet we have not had the written Order through which we are hoping will shed some light on it but this is a massive setback. Can we get the claim reinstated? TheyrCriminals

Hi, Devastated. Friends bank charges claim struck out. We spent ages working on our written submissions, we incorporated the Supreme Court Judgement and the directing to S.5 UTCCR's we also sent the court an entire copy of the judgement. Additionally included the positive development in the Scottish case of Sharp v Bank of Scotland plc (2010). It didn't work Judge threw whole claim out. Any suggestions anyone? TheyrCriminals

Hi, Or is this approach naive? TheyrCriminals

Hi Hallowitch, Thanks for the reply. The thing is I really don't mind them knowing what I have, it's like I would rather get it over and done with then they can see how much I have got which is pittance. Once they are satisfied I have given them all I can then they should leave me alone, I mean I know they can come back and next time it need not be peaceful entry but if I have nothing to give them they can come back as many times as they want I don't care. TheyrCriminals

Hi, Can someone please urgently help me. I have certificated bailiffs (Equita Ltd) coming tomorrow. However I live in a student house share and there are 6 of us. We all have locks on our doors and the tenancy agreement states that my agreement is for room 5. However we have a communal lounge area, kitchen and bathroom. I know by law that once a certificated bailiff has gained peaceful entry that he can break down locked bedroom and cupboard doors, I don't mind about my room (I think I will be letting them in as I own hardly anything and they can take what I have) my concern is for my fellow housemates would the bailiffs be able to brake down my fellow housemates bedroom doors? Any help greatly appreciated. TheyrCriminals

Hi, Sorry to ask again but does anyone know of any official referencing system I can use to reference the recent Scottish case of Sharp v Bank of Scotland plc. The reason being is that I am inserting the case into a letter to bring to the judges attention in an attempt to stop HSBC being successful in their strikeout application. It's great that I have the name and year of the case but the judge will want a full reference, or even a copy of the judgement/Order, so that it can be verified. I have one hour left before we have to send the letter off. Urgent help appreciated, TheyrCriminals

Hi means2anend, Many thanks for your previous post, it was very useful. TheyrCriminals

Hi, If we were to cite the recent Scottish decision in allowing an amendment of PoC in our bid to block HSBC's strikeout application is there any official referencing system I can use when I bring this case to the attention of the Judge? TheyrCriminals

Hi srfrench, Thanks for that, TheyrCriminals

Hi, Could anyone please post up the relevant section of the Supreme Court judgement that speaks of the new legal avenue under S.5 UTCCR's? Thanks, TheyrCriminals

Hi, Could anyone please post up the relevant section of the Supreme Court judgement that speaks of the new legal avenue under S.5 UTCCR's? Thanks, TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, Something troubles me. Me and my friend are currently in the process of drafting a letter to the County Court, we are trying to stop HSBC's attempts to strikeout my friends bank charges claim by asking for permission for the Particluars of Claim to be amended so as to incorporate the two new legal arguments. There is one line in the letter however that is worrying and we don't know how to respond it states: ‘On the 25th November 2009 the Supreme Court ruled that it was not permissible to challenge the fairness of bank charges under Regulation 5(1) of the UTCCR’s on the basis that they are too high because that form of challenge is precluded by Regulation 6(2)(b). Regulation 6(2)(b) provides that the assessment (under Regulation 5(1)) of the fairness of a term in a contract "shall not relate...to the adequacy of the price or remuneration, as aagainst the goods or services supplied in exchange" In other words, the value for money equation is excluded. Surely, even for a bank, this is a pretty bold 'lie'? What is the best way to respond to this? I am assuming of course that the above position is not correct. TheyrCriminals

Hi, How persuasive would a ruling from a Scottish Court be in an English Court? TheyrCriminals

Hi, Great news but my friend has a hearing for a strikeout Order coming up and he doesn't know what to do. Is there any way anyone can come up with something because I think it may be best to have a go at a amendment of PoC than just do nothing and have the claim struck out. Any help greatly appreciated. TheyrCriminals

Hi plshelp, Was your claim a hardship claim? TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, My friend has just had a very interesting letter from DG Solicitors regarding his HSBC claim. HSBC are applying for a strikeout of his bank charges claim. There is one paragraph in the letter that is quite worrying it says: On the 25th November 2009 the Supreme Court ruled that it was not permissible to challenge the fairness of bank charges under Regulation 5(1) of the UTCCR's on the basis that they are too high because that form of challenge is precluded by Regulation 6(2)(b). Regulation 6(2)(b) provides that the assessment (under Regulation 5(1)) of the fairness of a term in a contract "shall not relate...to the adequacey of the price or remuneration, as against the goods or services supplied in exchange". In other words the 'value for money' equation is excluded. The banks argued, and the Supreme Court agreed, that the informal overdraft charges are part of the price for personal current account services and that, therefore, the Regulation 6(2)(b) exception applies with the consequence that the charges cannot be found to be unfair on the basis that they are too high. I thought that the Supreme Court had only ruled on S.6 UTCCR's and actually went further by directing consumers to S.5 of the UTCCR's as a possible test for fairness of the charges. However what DG Solicitors seem to be saying is that the Supreme Court also ruled that the charges can not be challenged under S.5. Does anybody know if this is correct or is this an error or deliberate strategy to fend off these claims? What should he do? TheyrCriminals

Do you mean that the charges were found to be penalties under common law? And who found them to be penalties? TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, How can MSE state that the recent Supreme Court ruling in the bank charges test case doesn't impact on reclaiming credit card charges. It is precisely the same laws that are used for reclaiming credit card charges that is used for reclaiming bank charges, what's the difference? TheyrCriminals

Hi Phantom, That's good news in many ways. However what did you say in your letter to the Court for them to respond and allow the fee to be waived? Or do you think that the POC amendment fee waive is a general rule for all bank charge claimants? TheyrCriminals

Hi Guys, Can someone please tell me where I send my first PPI letter to, I am reclaiming PPI on a Natwest Credit Card. Thanks, TheyrCriminals