OFT test case

[Conniff]

However, whichever side loses is expected to appeal, possibly all the way to the House of Lords, meaning the issue may not be resolved until next year.

 

I find this a bit scary. The further up the chain this moves, the higher salaried are the decision makers and the further away from the real world they are, and that don't bode well for an OFT success.

[Conniff]

You're all wrong. You all love having charges and this site has made you go against what you like best and reclaim, against your better judgement.

 

Current account customers like the present system of charges under which they only pay when they are in the red, the High Court was told.

 

Have we got a jokes forum to put that one in?

[Conniff]

Well it's not just the UK and cag any longer:

 

 

 

Bank charges attacked around the world

 

Bank customers in numerous countries around the world have been complaining about the cost of having an account.

The Israeli government has just agreed that the country's central bank should regulate commercial bank charges. In the UK tens of thousands of people have, successfully, been suing their banks for the return of overdraft charges. BBC correspondents report from South Africa, the Czech Republic and Australia about the growing consumer revolt.

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Bank charges attacked around the world

[Conniff]

This is going back to a point made earlier:

 

Milligan returned to his setting out. During this he listed Barclays 4 or 5 ‘services’ for a payment or non-payment:

 

4. If insufficient funds are available the granting of an unauthorised overdraft is considered. This consideration is a contractual obligation.

 

5. If granted, a letter of notice of an unauthorised overdraft stating the terms is provided.

 

point 4, how can you grant an 'un'authorised overdraft? If you grant it then you are authorising it.

 

point 5, a letter is sent informing and stating the terms is provided. If they are stating the terms after the fact, then that must be an unfair way to do it. We don't sign agreements and contracts and have the terms filled in afterwards.

[Conniff]

don't want to sound ungrateful but am after some "provenance" to support the statement thanks.

 

 

I have searched on five search engines and none of them come up with an authorative answer, they all have suppositions and guesses.

[Conniff]

So far in court the banks have been saying this is a 'package of services', with one downfall, the consumer would never opt in for a 'no payment to creditor but payment to the bank' part as a service. No service has been carried out apart from that of providing the bank with money.

 

It cannot be classed as a service if it constantly deprives you, in fact you should be able to take it back to the shop (bank) and ask for your money back as it only deprived you of your money and did'nt provide a service, how did they sell this service?.

 

If someone can find me in the dictionary where 'customer service' means you are supposed to pay people for serving themselves, I'll be amazed.

 

 

So how can the likes of the Alliance and Leicester class it as a service if they charge £35 for that service and then five days later charge you another £35 for that same service. Me thinks they are clutching at straws and have said knickers in the proverbial twist.

[Conniff]

So what are we to 'search' for to access this new Wiki?

[Conniff]

dave wrote:

 

That would depend on what you wanted to find our.

This one

 

Excellent idea.

 

Also, we should compile an up-to-date list of bank accounts and their charges - there is a list in here somewhere, but it's out of date - the charges/T&Cs have changed etc...

 

All the time we're still being forced by out own government into buying these 'services', we need a 'real world' banking chart to minimise the sting.

 

Couple that with a list of 'best buy' services that do not require a DD (or at least are not penalised for doing so) and I think we'd have a decent little resource.

 

Any volunteers?

 

I'll happilly format it and put it in the wiki/forum/Excel/PDF etc...

 

I could also put it in a searchable database. You can search for a gas supplier for instance, and narrow the search by penalties for not paying by DD, or payments accepted over bank/PO counters, etc...

[Conniff]

mailmannz wrote:

 

it would only be a 30 second fix by the banks to ensure you cant do that (but then again, there is no money in this for the banks is there!).

 

Well there you go, you have just shot your own argument down.

[Conniff]

Maybe It’s just me but I find it very odd that the main thread for the test case has been relegated to a difficult-to-find sub forum in ‘Campaign’.

 

The test case is arguably the single most import event in the history of bank charges - the reason for this site’s existence - and it’s given very little prominence , in stark contrast to other sites.

 

One can only guess as to why.

 

As there is practically no reports in the media, it's hard to do other than have a conjectured chat and summise at what is happening.

 

this is a democracy

 

Gosh - is it, could have fooled me.

[Conniff]

It may be a bit unfair to say someone 'don't deserve'. There are a lot of people who have two jobs to make ends meet, come home get the kids to bed, have time to watch the soaps and then get themselves off to bed ready for anothers hard day.

There are quite a number of the population who wouldn't see the news for very genuine reasons.

 

I think it would be to the satisfaction of those not happy with banks to do their utmost to bring to the attention of anyone who would be liable for a rebate the fact (supposing it goes in the customers favour).

 

I would hate to think of some poor soul who has debt andcould really do with the money, and got in that situation mainly because of the bank, not reclaiming it because then did not know they could.

 

I don't think anyone subscribing to this board would really like to see the banks get away with something they are not entitled to.

[Conniff]

 

God forgive the money lenders & this government who are allowing this to happen

 

A few weeks ago during Prime ministers questions, the libdems asked Gordon Brown if he was aware that 27,000 home repossessions were granted during 2007 and that the number was expected to double during 2008.

His answer was Quote We have to keep the economy on track Unquote

 

I take that to mean "Not my problem".