pmsl !

The OFT have been dealing with consumer groups including MSE, LB and PC and no doubt, if CAG can sort out their conference call with the OFT, they can put their views forward. Each site have given their views on various different legal approaches that could be used and so most groups agree on the OFT taking the case forward. The banks fielded lots of QC's and the OFT fielded 2 in the whole case. The OFT won twice and the bank won the third one but not entirely a convincing win.

Ditto with your last statement....

saying what ?

Is it possible that CAG and MSE etc,etc, could look at this question and give advice since these cases are URGENT and some people's claims could potentially be struck out if they do nothing. Can site team come back on this question at some point over the next few days? Thanks

Whack-a-banker Games - GamesClub.com YOU HAVE GOT TO PLAY THIS and enjoy it

Comments edited. I'm an orange is legal B eagles as per the announcements on the forum. The post quoted above has also been updated since then with a bit more info.

Superb, someone else with the same embarrassing score

Benefits to me personally: I benefited when I did my degree in European Studies in the 1990's from the ERASMUS program with cash to help me to live on in my year abroad in Spain. I don't have any disadvantages personally. Apologies that my arguments are not that particularly spectacular but these are my personal benefits and disadvantages. I could state as the advantages that membership of the EC stabilised the young democracy in Spain(not england so not necessarily relevant). Or I could say that the Common Agricultural Policy is a negative but I don't really understand those arguments. I haven't really thought about the whole topic. Isolationism politically has never really worked. North Korea are doing really well from it as a really bad example of it in action.

Have you written to your MP if you are unhappy with the way public funds have been used? I'm not angry yet......once they put the taxes up then I will be livid but not quite yet

But we do not own any banks, and we are shareholders in 2 banks. If the bank paid for legal advice in the test case so be it. It is not really that relevant is it really?

Nope since the bank bail out was debts within the investment sections of the banks rather than the litigation side of the banks and they always have budgets set aside anyway. Further, we don't own the majority of banks and it was Barclays QC, who advised Sumption for the HoL Appeal.

See above Fred. I do understand your view even if I disagree with you. The question I have is twofold; what are you scared of? and how has the EU affected you personally directly? For many people here, UTCCR 1999 is an EC Directive which has had a big effect on their lives

On financial hardship, the bank didn't have to pay out under the FSA waiver, and even today, under BCOBS they do not have to pay out but they can do for the period of time in which you have suffered financial hardship to alleviate it. They should be able to make a decision but a delay in response does not necessarily mean that they haven't made a response.

the "you" is not aimed at you, it is merely my phrasing of it. Apologies for misunderstanding. I think whether you accept/decline/ ask for more has to be about what the money does for your hardship today. If it alleviates it, then I would accept it.

I have to say that BCOBS still is in force(formerly the lending code). I'm having a good look at that at some point this weekend because it is very similar to the FSA Waiver on Bank Charges(no longer in use). The approach is similar but the important thing that many people do not get is that it is about things that lose you your house, your liberty, etc,etc, and you might in financial hardship on one account but not another account.

When did the OFT actually say that though? They are currently preparing new guidelines for next year and that there have been consultations with groups such as citizen's advice but guidelines by a regulator do not constitute evidence in court about the law. Regardless of anything the law is prominent in any court case and not just some guidance issued.

for us ! it's less than £1 for every person who is actively reclaiming charges (approx 1.3 million at last count ) and the banks bills will be much higher. The OFT's budget for the year (2006-2007) is Ł55m (plus Ł19m for. Consumer Direct)

There is nothing that stops you accepting it and still asking for the full amount but it would not be under financial hardship though. It does not mean that should there be a further period of hardship that you couldn't go back and ask for a refund of future charges and interest(if you get what I mean) for that period of hardship.

where have they?

Again need an explanation since I don't get what you mean.

That is issue I would have, ie if the cash machine will say no to you and not charge you, why does the consideration from others lead to a charge. The problem is that price is out so the obvious thing is how things were presented to the individual. I still can't get price out of my head and that is a big issue for me. I think ECJ referral on reg 5(1) and the grey list could be the way forward to clarify definitively how it is to be interpreted if price is a no go. I have no exit route to a refund if I use price as the argument.

Kennyh, just to clarify something, the bit that is showing on the margin under the name is not put on by anyone else but the site itself. It will say donate to the site, etc, etc,. That bit of the Cag profile is not user generated. The Avatar is and the signature underneath of a post is but not the body. Hope that clarifies the point. With regards to the argument on what service is given. The consideration of whether to pay or not pay or increase an overdraft is what was argued in the courts so that is the service provided. I have to say I have no idea where this is going at the moment cos I am literally on the fence on this one. Some days I think it will be refund of all charges, then refunds of only some charges and other days no refunds whatsoever. I hope Ray Cox, QC has some good arguments cos I think we could find out that we will head to the ECJ on a test case on regulation 5(1) since it is unclear how imbalance can be arrived at without cost involved.

MSE have quoted that they may be available by the end of the week or early next week.

Jan make a written complaint and ask them to listen to the call since they would have a log of the call. Furthermore, ask them to reinstate the payment plan and refund any monies taken since the error was made by them not you. Keep everything in a chronological order. When they reply post up and we will see where we go from there.