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

[missdpd]

BBC2 charges on now

[T2upNorth]

send this link to everyone on your facebook page and in your contacts list in email

 

https://email.number10.gov.uk/Contact.aspx

 

it is so important

 

 

Sent to Gordon:

 

Although not entirely shocked by the result I find it astonishing that it has taken over 2 years for the most senior legal minds in the UK to come to this conclusion. This matter has been festering for to long and the government, and opposition parties have simply allowed it. Now to close the case on a technical argument, overturning 2 previous rulings, makes it impossible to have any faith in the law, law makers, government and financial institutions.

I for one will be moving, as far as possible, back to a cash economy - I will not have my money used by crooks who feel it acceptable to steal £39 in exchange for a non-service.

Also, along with many of the other 12 million who have been kicked in the teeth by this travesty, I find it impossible to even consider voting for a government who allows its employers (yes, that's us) to be regularly robbed and abused by the banks we have so kindly bailed out of trouble.

 

Have a nice day.

[scared001]

forgive my ignorance but in idiot terms what is a reg 5?? ive just called abbey and she was going into a meeting, hmm, i wonder? im looking forward to my 5pm phone call tonight!!

[missdpd]

Gordon Brown says they imposed new charging structures to make it fairer to the consumer? Surely thats saying that the old system was unfair then?

[gemspan]

This isn't the PM's fault!!! It's a system that has been corrupt for years working once again for big business!!!

 

What I can't understand is how an unelected body can decide matter of such significance!!! Especially when that unelected body is now under investigation for potential fraud in relation to expenses claims.

 

Gordon Brown ain't to blame here. He seems to get all the flack for everything! If you think he is to blame then spell it out to me!!

 

I would have imagined that the PM would welcome a decision in favour of the consumer as, effectively, this would mean there would be more money generating in the economy.

 

I think the best idea would be to email your MP and see what they do for you! Bearing in mind a GE is on the horizon, ALL the political parties need to show us what they are made off!

 

If anybody thinks life will be better under the Tories then think again!! This ruling is exactly what the Tories stand for - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer!!

 

I'm gutted but like the sound of resurrecting the court cases under Regulation 5.

 

Gemspan

[scared001]

rubbish parliament, theyre all half asleep and hungover probably....im so pi88ed off with this country i really am.....if only i could sort out all my debts i would be off tomorrow i really would.....im gonna fight this all the way....im so angry.

[kennyh]

Just how do we get a 'stay' lifted?

I know it's a dead liberty but do any of the mods think that revised poc will emerge in a fairly short time. This, any enquiry from one who doesn't really know his a**e from his elbow - just ask the wife!

The Banks will work with the regulators to ensure that the outstanding customer complaints are brought to a swift conclusion.

I'll bet they b****y well will - but in whose favour?

 

RGS1

So there has actually been no ruling on fairness. Is this correct?

Reckon so

 

Booky

Lord Phillips also noted that in the absence of the charges the banks would not be able profitably to provide current account services without a fee

Wasn't this somewhat outside the terms of reference?

Seminole

So the ruling only has the effect of stopping the OFT from making a ruling. It doesn't say anything about fairness and doesn't strike out the Regulations (which are a statutory instrument). Personally I think it means that people can still make claims and have individual county court decisions on whether they're fair or not. If the claims are based on the Regulations rather than the penalties issue, there must still be a reasonable chance of success. Am I missing something here?

I hope Seminole's correct here

 

RGS1

Do we think small claims cases maybe thrown out because of this judgement though???

Bet your sweet life 'they'll' try for dismissal to see if they get any mileage.

 

If you are in small claims court a draft order to reveal to the true cost of a bounce or unauthorised overdraft could help swing things our way.

Definitely a good way forward and I know from personal experience that some judges are inclined toward a suggested DoD

 

Whizzkid

The OFT set out its concerns in relation to unarranged overdraft charges as part of its 2008 market study. This found that banks earn around a third of their retail revenues from unarranged overdraft charges that are difficult to understand, not transparent, and not subject to effective consumer control.

Any idea why this never got more of an 'airing'?

Booky

Well, the appeals courts hadn't given permission for the banks to appeal to the HOL and they still did, not sure how it goes at the ECJ, but can't the OFT appeal anyway?

Thought I'd read somewhile ago that the ECJ had already made a ruling which favoured the punter.

 

robnfc

The stay now has to be lifted

Still no judgement as to the fairness

The banks well never explain these charges in court

At least 2 out of 3 can't be bad.

 

psm

You all need to check the wording on your stays, i am sure the onus was with us to progress the claim in a limited amount of time once a decision was finally made

Can we have some guidance on this please.....

 

Finally remember folks - "when you're up to your a**e in alligators the aim of the exercise is to drain the swamp"

Edited November 25, 2009 by kennyh
spelling

[scared001]

surely the wonderful PM can overule greedy LORD P, no?? if he agrees with us mere mortals then why hasnt he stood his ground on this one, hes the boss, right?

[adamski]

Regulation 5 means basically that any contract and its terms must be negotiated how many of you negotiated charges with your bank when you opened the account?

[TIGGERCAT]

Just sent my e-mail to the PM

Unfortunately he's out at PMQ and just said it may now be able to raise a class action!

WTF is the point in the OFT?

Just goes to show the class system is still at large in this country

 

 

THEM AND US!

 

tigger

[sparks199]

everyone is a winner here trust me

heres how it will plan out

 

the rulling stops a mass payout safeing the banks billions .

but we will all be offered a payout of sorts calling it a goodwill gesture.

some may accept some wont .

if you dont you can then take it to court .

the banks will change there charges to fall into line

 

the banks will still payout to thoses that have made a calim but it maybe a little less than you fault .

 

but like i sed there are many that havnt put in a calim therefore safeing the bank billions .. by only paying in part to thoses that accept

 

it was the only way to get the rulling so everyone is a winner

 

trust me . all that will happen now is that the OFT will do a behind close doors deal with the bank to negotiated the new charges

[adamski]

Reg 5

Further under the UTCCR, Regulation 5 provides:

"5. - (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.

(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.

(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was.”

Schedule 2 also includes such clauses (to define examples of unfair clauses) as:

(i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract;

(j) enabliFurther under the UTCCR, Regulation 5 provides:

"5. - (1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

(2) A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term.

(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.

(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was.”

Schedule 2 also includes such clauses (to define examples of unfair clauses) as:

(i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract;

(j) enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract;

(m) giving the seller or supplier the right to determine whether the goods or services supplied are in conformity with the contract, or giving him the exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract.ng the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract;

(m) giving the seller or supplier the right to determine whether the goods or services supplied are in conformity with the contract, or giving him the exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract.

[a_jam_sandwich]

Sent ...

 

I am writing to tell of my disappointment at the result of the test case verdict announced today by the Supreme Court. The verdict has done little to bring to a close the issues of charges imposed by banks for being overdrawn. The ruling seems to imply that the Office of Fair Trading has no say on if a charge value is fair or disproportionate. The result means unless I am incorrect that claims against the banks can continue and that the small claims court will on a per case basis decide if charges against a consumer can be recovered. It seems that the last 2.5yrs have resulted in nothing to bring clarity to the issue, and only that OFT can not decide what is or is not a fair charge.

[jclancy]

For what it's worth, here's my blog on the Birmingham Post in response to the decision, although I've not read the decision in full yet:

 

Banks win - but it should still be payback time if the politicians have courage and are on the side of the consumer. - Birmingham Post - Business Blog

[scared001]

thanks adam, errr no i dont believe i did negotiate any charges with any of the thieving **EDITED**.....this has just got people riled and if anything the courts are going to be inundated with complaints.....

Edited November 25, 2009 by car2403
Steady on there...

[charley2212]

maybe they did not want it broadcast but i suspect induvidually each case will suceed if done correctly, and not every one will bother which is what they would of wanted instead of a tsunami of claims which is what would of happened , and every one would of clambered on board , and added to the problem they now face . merely an opinion

[scared001]

see, its ok for all of them, they earn thousands plus mp expenses and LORD P prob doesnt have DCAs chasing them or threatening with doorstep collection, this countrys a joke, no vote from me thats for sure.

[sparks199]

maybe they did not want it broadcast but i suspect induvidually each case will suceed if done correctly, and not every one will bother which is what they would of wanted instead of a tsunami of claims which is what would of happened , and every one would of clambered on board , and added to the problem they now face . merely an opinion

 

That is spot on to what iv been saying .

[hsbcfiddled]

done

 

me too

[adamski]

having just watched Moron Brown take on the ruling he seems to be on the consumers side, he mentions the FSA bill in the house of lords now and talks of class action against banks involving groups of customers taking banks to court, my first reaction is when this bill comes about why don't CAG have a class action against the banks?

[charley2212]

That is spot on to what iv been saying .

sorry sparks not trying to steal your thunder

i think we have to wait for the oft anouncment in dec when god knows , but in the meantime discuss find a positive and open it wide enough to jump in ,

[whizzkid001]

Just spotted this, the FSA Waiver has been ended! - FSA ends bank charges claims hold - MoneySavingExpert News

[Thailand]

having just watched Moron Brown take on the ruling he seems to be on the consumers side, he mentions the FSA bill in the house of lords now and talks of class action against banks involving groups of customers taking banks to court, my first reaction is when this bill comes about why don't CAG have a class action against the banks?

 

I thought the same. Cash would be the issue I think.

 

Donation time...and I'm up for that if they did!

[sparks199]

sorry sparks not trying to steal your thunder

i think we have to wait for the oft anouncment in dec when god knows , but in the meantime discuss find a positive and open it wide enough to jump in ,

 

yep all this has done is to put things back to july 2007 before the test case .

 

it has just given the banks 2 and a half years grace

[Thailand]

Is there a limit to how many people can bring a class action? How would it be arranged? Doable?