Jump to content

manchesteruni

Registered.
  • Content Count

    139
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Excellent

About manchesteruni

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d0f130de426a8fcc4f8b49dba34ce0f4b427a14f.e34KaxiLc3eQc40LaxqMbN4Ob3mOe0?text=&docid=122164&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=334993 (Relevant to Bank Charges case – Foster-Burnell v Lloyds Bank August 2014 ) 45 Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable. On those grounds, the Court (First Chamber) hereby rules: 1. It is for the national court, ruling on an action for an injunction, brought in the public interest and on behalf of consumers by a body appointed by national law, to assess, with regard to Article 3(1) and (3) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, the unfair nature of a term included in the general business conditions of consumer contracts by which a seller or supplier provides for a unilateral amendment of fees connected with the service to be provided, without setting out clearly the method of fixing those fees or specifying a valid reason for that amendment. As part of this assessment, the national court must determine, inter alia, whether, in light of all the terms appearing in the general business conditions of consumer contracts which include the contested term, and in the light of the national legislation setting out rights and obligations which could supplement those provided by the general business conditions at issue, the reasons for, or the method of, the amendment of the fees connected with the service to be provided are set out in plain, intelligible language and, as the case may be, whether consumers have a right to terminate the contract. 2. Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13, read in conjunction with Article 7(1) and (2) thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that: – it does not preclude the declaration of invalidity of an unfair term included in the standard terms of consumer contracts in an action for an injunction, provided for in Article 7 of that directive, brought against a seller or supplier in the public interest, and on behalf of consumers, by a body appointed by national legislation from producing, in accordance with that legislation, effects with regard to all consumers who concluded with the seller or supplier concerned a contract to which the same general business conditions apply, including with regard to those consumers who were not party to the injunction proceedings; – where the unfair nature of a term in the general business conditions has been acknowledged in such proceedings, national courts are required, of their own motion, and also with regard to the future, to take such action thereon as is provided for by national law in order to ensure that consumers who have concluded a contract with the seller or supplier to which those general business conditions apply will not be bound by that term.
  2. Nice one thanks Dodgeball, I tried for ages to compress the damn thing ! xx
  3. lol, fair enough - you'll have to google the judgment I'm afraid as CAG won't allow it to be posted on here and I can't upload it as its too big (12 MB I think).
  4. It's up now for listen again - from about 22:34 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04h7kh7 then theres a bit of a break for the news/sport/travel then a bit more Q&A with Martin.
  5. Just to let you know that Orforster will be on Radio 5 live tmw lunchtime ( 12.15 I believe) discussing his case with Martin Lewis (MSE).
  6. I expect so He'll get around to updating his thread later I expect xxx
  7. Lloyds TSB has been ordered to pay a customer over £1700 after it unfairly applied bank charges to his account and damaged his credit file. In what we believe is the first bank charges court claim victory since such cases were stayed in July 2007, Oliver Foster-Burnell (‘orfoster’) has been successful in his claim for a refund of charges and interest. The claim was brought against Lloyds TSB at Taunton County Court where Mr Deputy District Judge Stockdale held that despite the Supreme Court judgment, the unarranged overdraft charges levied on Mr Foster-Burnell were contrary to the requirement of good faith as per section 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and, as such, unfair.
  8. In addition, and for clarification, the announcement which the original poster interpreted was this
  9. I haven't spoken to Martin properly in a long time but once we were quite close. I am very sad to hear of his passing, far too early. I agree with the sentiments expressed by Bankfodder - he was an intelligent man who up until CAG hadn't really found an outlet for his knowledge and passion. I am sure he will be missed by many many people. RIP Martin3030
  10. http://www.bba.org.uk/media/article/bba-statement-regarding-judical-review "The BBA on behalf of its members judicially reviewed the FSA and the FOS regarding the retrospective elements in the proposed FSA rules for handling PPI complaints. The judgement was handed down on 20 April 2011 and found in favour of FSA and the FOS. The BBA was given until 10 May 2011 to appeal. "In the interest of providing certainty for their customers, the banks and the BBA have decided that they do not intend to appeal. "We continue to believe that there are matters of important principle which we will be taking forward in other ways with the authorities." Notes to Editors Complaints handling guidance If you feel you have grounds for complaint you should contact your bank directly. There is no need to use a complaints management company.
  11. Judgment will be handed down 10am Wednesday 20th April 2011.
  12. The 'service' you pay for is the bank considering whether to allow you the overdraft or not. The new lending code does require banks to give 14 days notice of charges, and should be in force beginning of April.
  13. P.s. Like the blog post linked in your sig - echos my sentiments exactly xx
×
×
  • Create New...