H.O.L Test case appeal. Judgement Declared. ***See Announcements***

[dave]

You're entitled to your opinion, but despite the gloomy nature of the press, as a country we are currently almost as affluent as we've been at any point in our history... although it's precarious, and we are suffering compared to a few years ago...

 

I'm talking about the things that happen in countries were the s**t really hits the fan... like 1929, where people can't afford to feed themselves... like it is in zimbabwe, which shows you how quickly a prosperous nation can decline into abject poverty.

 

Bottom line is, what I think CAG has always stood for is making sure the consumer gets a fair deal... and we owe that to you... but we don't need to destroy the banks to do that. All we want is fair treatment. That means the banks should be allowed to make a reasonable profit, without forcing the poorest people in society into poverty.

 

I have to disagree there - I earn a very good wage yet over the past year I've been forced to sell my home and my car.

 

Day to day living costs have risen faster than at any time I can remember (and yes, I DO remember the 80's).

 

I agree that banks should make a REASONABLE profit, yet at a time when they are asking for handouts or our money and that of their shareholders they are STILL publishing pre-tax profits in the billions, a lesson needs to be taught.

 

It is the banks that are forcing the poorest of society into poverty (that and other things that are out of the scope of this site). A boycotting of the 8 main offending banks won't make any difference - the same money will be in circulation, just in different hands. It will send a message that we are still their customers and without us they can't exist.

 

Competition in any business sector can only be good - if 8 of them want to club together to create a virtual cartel, then the only option open to us if those that are paid to protect us from this profiteering don't do their job, is to vote with our feet.

[dave]

"Talk is cheap."

 

that depends on whats being said and who says it.

 

Freedom of speech is something we should cherish a lot of countries dont have it .

 

...and I don't believe we've ever truly had freedom of speech - and I think we are on a path to losing what freedom of speech we have left.

 

By "talk is cheep", I mean it's easy to talk about this and do nothing.

 

If my suggestion is not a good one, then ok, I'll concede, but only if a better plan is laid on the table.

[JOSH_IOU]

The idea is to stop them from adding charges to our accounts.

We should be pusshing this through. Even now.

 

To get the best of both worlds we need to use all of our tools.

 

Talk is only cheap when we arent pushing on all fronts.

 

I agree with you partially dave but if there is no legal side of this I aint joining in.

 

I am finally getting these t**s off my back.

 

If you wanna boycot something then the oil depot's is the job they were listining but because the support dropped the prices have shot up.

 

We wont get police support without playing it by the book at least some of the way.

[JOSH_IOU]

I do think a peacful protest will do the trick with media coverage.

[dave]

The petrol protest are a different matter, however the support dropped simply because it changed very little and it hurt ourselves in the process.

 

Time is now for change - even the police are not happy with the whole state of affairs - a dangerous position for any government to be in.

[JOSH_IOU]

I agree whole heartley with that assesment Dave.

 

I strongly belive the OFT should be in some sort of control with this.

 

However I do think we need more power over this. Maybe we should be doing more stuff to get the waiver lifted .

 

After all it was groups like this that wanted the banks to go to court.

 

Constructive crtisism is always welcomed !!!!

[breeze1996]

Am I right in thinking our PM's Office have to acknowledge every letter and answer it?

 

If so can't we all send a letter about bank charges and make him have to answer them all.

 

Also we could design a car sticker and show our support.

 

Make it one we can just print out and stick in the car.

[JOSH_IOU]

Milktray..... Its a democratic society cus there members get to choose who run the branch. No one ever mentioned the word liberal.

 

We the customers need to challenge these people in court.

 

We can not do this because of the waiver. Complaing isnt going to get us any where.

 

30 of us is not going to do the trick we need to alter our aproach and complain to the master of rolls.

 

We started on the courts now we need to aproach the FSA they are getting away lightly from or side of things. (compared to the courts)

[dave]

I do honestly think that any protest like writing to MPs is now a moot point - we've done it to death. We're playing their game on their court (no pun intended).

 

I think it's time for change - their way hasn't worked. There is no real reason why this should take anything like this amount of time to sort out.

 

Any reasonable person cannot expect a service from any profit making business for *free* - being subsidised by those that can least afford it.

 

For the people we pay to stop this from happening to allow it for so long (turning a blind eye perhaps) and then when forced to do something about it (as someone so aptly put earlier in this thread) allow banks to stall and abuse their position for an extra 2-5 years is a disgrace.

 

It's time to vote with our feet - we'd do it with any other industry. The fact that people fear the economic repercussions should surely show that this industry has become too powerful and needs to be kept in check.

 

People happily (pretended to) vote with their feed with the boycotting BP campaigns that were going around (and I'm sure they were laughed at as we all were by Two-Jags at the time), so why not boycott the offending parties now?

 

The banks probably know which way this is going to go - I don't and I don't pretend to know - and if it is in the right direction, they know what effect this appeal will be having and they do not care.

 

I say we pick a bank that is the best of a bad bunch and anyone using the bad 8 move their accounts from them to whichever it may be.

[darftblerk]

The worrying outcome from this case is the spinelessness of the OFT. Being a governmental regulatory body, they should be in control of this and calling the shots.

 

If the OFT loose, or at least don't win outright, think of all the larger corporations that will take advantage of this apparent weakness:

 

Insurance

Mortgage Lenders

Public Utility Corporations

 

Any private business that deals with financial services will start relaxing in the knowledge that the OFT have lost face and daren't challenge them.

 

I'm planning on being out of the country within the next 5 years.

[dave]

We've already written to the master of the rolls, and indeed anyone and everyone we thought could (and would) make a difference.

 

Guess what?

 

It didn't (make a difference that is).

 

We, as consumers, need to send a message and send it to where it hurts.

[dave]

darftblerk, you are exactly right.

 

Lose this case, and it gives free range to all financial bodies to fleece us - knowing that there is no recourse.

 

That's why we need to show that we can still have a choice - I know I've mentioned it before, but it's not that tricky to live without a bank account. I haven't got one, and it feels good. Very good.

 

I don't fear the postman any longer.

 

Although it's getting harder and harder to do this, it is possible. The banks need to be reminded who makes their obscene profits for them.

 

Can anyone see a problem with changing to the least evil of the banks and ditching the 8 that have appealed?

[renegotiation]

The banks are in bed with the CRA's and DCA's. Expand the site through more publicity. Initiate a forum on CRA's. Look to cause them as much aggravation as possible by going 'industrial'. They can be seriously hurt that way. They know it and don't like it IMHO. Why do Piers Morgan trolls keep turning in the DCA forums? Because they are being hurt financially and are fearful of DAG. At the moment it is just a relatively small pin being stuck in their rears. This site has the power to make it a large pitchfork. That is taking the gloves off in my view and perfectly moral in this unique situation. Expand DAG and give them the kicking they deserve!!! :evil:

 

As for Gordon Brown he makes me sick. He's a Labour PM and I haven't heard him say one bad word about bank charges! :confused: Unless I just missed it...

[JOSH_IOU]

I wasnt talking about the master of rolls.

 

The FSA have the power to lift this stay even now

 

They wont because there is not enough pressure on them.

 

This will hurt the banks the most this is why they asked the rolls to put the stay on in the first place.

 

A Northern rock aproach wont work becase we are tied into a contract with most banks.

[jansus]

But it did! the case is in court thats what you wanted

 

its not over yet.

 

I agree the pressure should be on again now the terms of the waiver have been abused , you have the evidence

 

publish some cases in the press - I am sure you woild get permission frm some claimants.

[dave]

Publicity is a problem - it costs money. Money we don't have sadly.

 

We may have to start advertising soon in any case - hopefully this will bring the funds we need to make that sort of thing happen, but it won't happen fast.

 

I agree, we are a thorn in their side - but that's it at the moment.

 

It would be great to be a great big spear in their side and force them to behave in a decent way.

 

Publicity can be found by creating stunts just like boycotting the 8 banks that have appealed.

 

"Consumer Action Group urges boycott of 8 biggest banks" - says BBC! ;-)

[dave]

A Northern rock aproach wont work becase we are tied into a contract with most banks.

 

Are you saying you cannot change bank account because of your contract with them?

 

I'm sorry (and this is said with all due respect), but that does sound like lazyness (I'm sure you are not lazy).

 

It's easy to change bank account. No contract holds you to that supplier of a service in the banking industry - it's not like a Sky or BT contract.

[JOSH_IOU]

Well why dont we produce letters - emails to send to every news desk in the country.

 

Spread the word on other forums.

[dave]

Sounds good to me - I'm just trying to gauge the level of support for such a move before that happens.

 

It would also be nice to have the backing of CAG on it, but that's not likely.

[jansus]

It does not cost much money to call the say for example mail and say " we have a hardship case that has had their case refused despite the terms of the waiver - they have given us permission to give you the details"

 

have you ever asked the FSA how many hardship cases the banks have identified and have had help since the waiver?

[JOSH_IOU]

Dave.

 

I am talking about HSBC.

 

I have taking a complaint up with them and they say I am tied into a contract.

[JOSH_IOU]

Jansus I no I have not no.

Could be a start to an email thoguh.

[nicsussex]

It would also be nice to have the backing of CAG on it, but that's not likely.

 

And why not?

[JOSH_IOU]

Can someone email websmaster?

 

I am sure he is as sick of the banks as we are.

 

Would be nice to get his input on this.

[renegotiation]

Create a flyer for people to print off and distribute down their street or in a busy high street or shopping centre. Then send an email en masse to all CAG members to please print it off and distribute it. I wanted to do this months ago, but I wasn't given the authority to do it and I wouldn't do it otherwise. I could do a few thousand in no time on a Saturday afternoon.