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

[car2403]

The reports are suggesting that the inevitable has happened - the banks have appealed the decision the charges are subject to the test of fairness under the UTCCR, so that will have to go to the Court of Appeal sometime this year and will ultimately end up in the House of Lords sometime next year.

[ukaviator]

The Press release is here:

 

The Office of Fair Trading: OFT statement on Case Management Conference

 

Copied over here;

 

23 May 2008

 

At the Case Management Conference, the judge gave the Banks permission to appeal his finding that the relevant terms can be assessed for fairness under the UTCCRs. Also, four of the Banks were refused permission to appeal the judge's findings that some of their terms are not in plain intelligible language. The OFT is not appealing any of the judge's findings. All the parties are agreed that the appeal process should happen as quickly as possible and are working with the court to achieve this.

 

Mr Justice Smith's Judgment of 24 April 2008 relates to relevant terms in current agreements between the Banks and customers and is restricted to those terms that were considered by the court. There will be a further hearing on 7, 8 and 9 July 2008 to determine whether the relevant terms in the Banks basic and historic personal current account contracts can also be assessed for fairness under the UTCCRs and whether they are capable of being penalties at common law.

 

OFT is continuing with its investigation into the fairness of the relevant terms in the Banks current terms and conditions. During July, we aim to be in a position to begin engaging with the Banks in relation to our preliminary views on the question of fairness.

 

NOTES

 

1.In April 2007 the OFT announced its investigation into the fairness of terms relating to unarranged overdraft and returned item fees (referred to as 'unarranged overdraft charges'). This followed on from the OFT's initial review of such terms, where the OFT concluded that it shared the public concern about the level and incidence of bank current account charges.

 

2. In July 2007 the OFT entered into an agreement with the largest current account providers in relation to bringing a test case in order to ensure an orderly and timely resolution of the legal issues associated with its investigation. This stage of the case was heard between 17 January and 8 February 2008, and dealt with certain preliminary issues of legal principle relating to whether the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs) apply to the banks' various current terms and conditions and whether the charges are capable of amounting to penalties at common law.

 

3. In April 2008 the judge ruled that:

 

The UTCCRs do apply to the banks' current T&Cs for unarranged overdraft charges

 

The banks' current T&Cs are in plain intelligible language (PIL) except for Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale and HBOS' T&Cs which are not in PIL in certain specific and minor respects, and

 

The banks' current T&Cs (and some historic T&Cs – that is, terms no longer in use) are not penalties at common law.

 

It is anticipated that Mr Justice Smith will be making an order to give effect to this Judgment next week.

 

The question of whether or not the T&Cs providing for the charges are actually unfair was not addressed in the stage 1A judgment (this is being addressed by our overall investigation and will be dealt with in stage 2 of the test case process).

 

4. The other parties to the test case are Abbey National plc, Barclays Bank plc, Clydesdale Bank plc, HBOS plc, HSBC Bank plc, Lloyds TSB Bank plc, Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc, and Nationwide Building Society. Together these current account providers account for about 90 per cent of personal current accounts in the UK.

 

5. In the course of its work on the issue we have liaised closely with the Financial Services Authority and have also held discussions with the main banks.

 

6. The OFT has also been conducting a market study which is taking a wide-ranging look at whether the personal current account market is working well for consumers. In particular we will assess the extent to which consumers help drive competition. The OFT plans to publish our findings in the next few weeks.

 

7. Further information on the background to the case can be found on this website. The FSA has also published guidance for consumers on its website. Download the High Court judgment (pdf 652 kb).

 

8. Relevant Terms: Terms in standard form Personal Current Accounts between the bank and the customer that provide for unarranged overdraft charges.

 

9. Basic and Historic Personal Account Contracts: This includes certain non-mainstream current accounts also.

[tomterm8]

My understanding is that the only thing to be appealed is the test of fairness under the UTCCR. The judge refused leave to appeal Plain English Language, and there will be abother CMC on 6/7 July, where (hopefully) the historical terms judgement should be announced. stays continue until the next CMC.

 

The decision of the judge not to allow an appeal on PEL, is likely to be appealed to the court of appeal. Sigh.

[hatebank1976]

none of this would be happing if we could go back to the days when we were paid in a packet where we handled our own cash , free banking that will be the day like i said earlier i worked for blackhorse part of lloyds and they have still manage to profit :?

[ANDENA]

perhaps an agreement with an existing credit union could be reached with cag getting a donation for each account opened???

we have got 1 in portland and 1 in weymouth plus will tell echo forum about Facebook.by the way weather in weymouth sunny.

[kennythecelt]

Statement on CMC by British Banking Association: 23/05/08

 

BBA – British Bankers' Association - Statement on permission to appeal

 

I notice they have a "have your say " poll, but the option of commenting on bank charges is not included. (I wonder why??)

Edited May 23, 2008 by kennythecelt

[darftblerk]

Are you seriously saying that if you owe £3000 say for example on an overdraft and you have one charge of £35.00 ( not sure there are any charges of £1.00 if there were we would not be claiming!) That you are advocating not repaying the overdraft and expecting the bank to freeze all further charges and interest just because of £35.00? You are saying they will not chase you for the monies or refer the case to a DCA?

 

Are you 100% sure of that before you recommend that on here - because once you get a bad credit history it is very hard to remove

 

I'm sure if you'd read my individual case, you'd see that my WHOLE overdraft is comprised of unfair charges. Therefore Barclays are trying to claim back money that wasn't their to start with.

 

The 1 pound example was simply that. If the banks want to put our claims on hold by dragging this out, they'll have to wait for their money back. Once an account is in dispute (Court Claim), and they stay it, they're not in a position to claim against you, in the same manner that they've stopped you claiming against them.

 

Further to this, you'll notice that Barlcays have applied continuos defaults against my account for one breach (which was bought about by unfair charges), therefore the banks have screwed me on their own terms, not through a fault of my own. They've caused my bad credit (1 default 6 years ago would be gone now), but they've snowballed it so that my credit history now looks blacker than soot.

 

I've done my time with 'discussing' these issues, if the banks don't want to play fair, neither will I:mad:

 

Please check your fact before rebutting my posts:rolleyes:

[ANDENA]

Statement on CMC by British Banking Association: 23/05/08

 

BBA – British Bankers' Association - Statement on permission to appeal

 

I notice they have a "have your say " poll, but the option of commenting on bank charges is not included. (I wonder why??)

i have signed up with moneywise.co.uk and they want to know what we think of bank charges also a quiz to find how much we know on the oft vbanks there is a cocky person on there saying they disagree with us claiming unfair charges thought somebody should put her or him in there place.

[jansus]

Quote"Please check your fact before rebutting my posts"

 

If you check my posts you will see that I have campaigned hard to help genuine hardship cases on this site a long time after my own case was settled and I could have just skulked off and got on with my life.

 

of course if the whole OD is made up of charges and interest on the charges then you should put the account in dispute and I hope you get more help to carry your fight forward - but that is not what you inferred in your post.

[ANDENA]

Quote"Please check your fact before rebutting my posts"

 

If you check my posts you will see that I have campaigned hard to help genuine hardship cases on this site a long time after my own case was settled and I could have just skulked off and got on with my life.

 

of course if the whole OD is made up of charges and interest on the charges then you should put the account in dispute and I hope you get more help to carry your fight forward - but that is not what you inferred in your post.

We are grateful for helping us keep up the good work.

[jansus]

By the way it was not a critisism more of a question are you 100% sure of your facts - hundreds of people wil read this thread and you are advising them to close their accounts and leave a debt that may be partly made up of charges and let the banks whistle for the rest - if that is legally true and you can get any subsequent legal action action reversed and any bad credit reports removed - then fair enough

 

So that is the question is that true?

[jansus]

Dave has advocated a run on the banks - not something I personally agree with.

 

What is the next campaign, assuming in light of the appeal that the waiver is not lifted?

 

what about asking the FSA how they define hardship /financial difficulty

 

What about asking the FSA how may cases the banks have dealt with under the terms of the waiver

 

How about asking the FSA have they any evidence that there are hardship cases that the banks have refused to at least consider.

 

Are their any cases on here that have asked the FOS for help that have been refused? If so why ?

 

Is it because the terms of the waiver are no clear enough ?

 

If so if the waiver continues perhaps it shoud be re-worded?

 

Why should people have their claims on hold - but the banks can just keep on charging?

 

How is the site going tackle the legal question of the banks taking benefits to pay charges?

 

Should the defiintion of hardship be more defined and apply to all banks?

 

Should the banking code be voluntary?

[jansus]

i have signed up with moneywise.co.uk and they want to know what we think of bank charges also a quiz to find how much we know on the oft vbanks there is a cocky person on there saying they disagree with us claiming unfair charges thought somebody should put her or him in there place.

 

You will always get those posters

 

I always find that arguing it is not the charges per se but the level of the charges that is wrong. The banks of course are a profit making business however they should not make a huge amount of profit from those struggling to make end meet . It is very rare that people go into OD on purpose - in 95% of cases I believe it is an error or through necessity.

[dave]

Dave has advocated a run on the banks - not something I personally agree with.

 

Indeed I have; I have also made it clear that it is not advocated by CAG.

 

(although personally I feel it should be)

[rdm2006]

and i agree with dave on this one. Shift the balance of power from the big 4 (or all 8 of them) and someone will soon sit up and listen

[HSBCrusher]

I can see nothing wrong with merely switching bank accounts... I did originally because HSBC decided to close mine... because I had the audacity to question why I was getting shafted with enormous bank charges.

 

I think voting with one's feet is a good way of showing the bank who's really boss. One bloke does it, who cares. One hundred folks does it, it's mildly amusing. 100,000 customers up sticks.... ah,. thats different.

[Bigmac versus]

And go where?

[HSBCrusher]

as has been suggested... any bank that are not of the "guilty" 8.

someone suggested the co-op bank.... but any bank would do.

[rob-the-viking]

I'm going to jump on the bandwagon and bin my HSBC account, already got a co-op joint account witht the missus for the mortgage and they have never caused us any problems, so I can't envisage there being a problem setting up another seperate account.

 

HSBC can lick my back wheels, I'd rather go to a pool party at Barrymore's house than put up with their breed of stupidity any longer.

 

Facebook group joined satis.

[Bigmac versus]

Ok got you, mass movement would be needed for anyone to take notice, would love to see that happen.

[jansus]

I think a lot of people who could have changed banks wold have done so already?

 

Why would you stay with a bank charging extortionate charges if there was an alternative?

 

the 8 are still representative of most of the other banks.

 

and all those not hit by charges will not move, in other words they wil keep the customers they want and find a sneaky way of charging them instead:(

[rdm2006]

and all those not hit by charges will not move, in other words they wil keep the customers they want and find a sneaky way of charging them instead

 

and these people will soon get fed up and move also (hopefully)

[ANDENA]

I think a lot of people who could have changed banks wold have done so already?

 

Why would you stay with a bank charging extortionate charges if there was an alternative?

 

the 8 are still representative of most of the other banks.

 

and all those not hit by charges will not move, in other words they wil keep the customers they want and find a sneaky way of charging them instead:(

what about post offices dont they do banking,as you well know i had rough deal with HSBC did get cheaper Loan to pay them back now got about £4.00 in account just in case need any more imfo,Hows it going on Facebook anybody know.

[HSBCrusher]

I think a lot of people who could have changed banks wold have done so already?

 

Why would you stay with a bank charging extortionate charges if there was an alternative?

 

the 8 are still representative of most of the other banks.

OK, it might be a similar bank you have moved to.

the point is that you have voted with your feet.

shown them you are not tolerating this crap any more.

any bank who decides to play fair/fairer would pick up business quickly.

we are far too loyal to our banks... being loyal to Judas!

[barracad]

what about post offices dont they do banking

 

You can only get benefits paid into a Post Office account.