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

[The Phantom]

Unlike its competitors HSBC hasnt made a comment about cases in the court system but it states that "complaints" are to remain on hold while discussions on the way forward are held with the FSA and OFT.

 

S.

 

Well, will see what happens next and probably open my own fresh thread on the topic if things start to move forward, sideways or backwards

[locutus]

Can someone explain to me why it is that whenever a point of law is decided in favour of the banks it suddenly becomes unimportant, and that the real issue is actually something quite different.

 

It has been said all along if this did go in favor of the OFT that the case was far from over.

 

I've always believed that the people that should be judging if a contract is fair or not are our county courts, not the OFT, and that seems to be re-affirmed by this judgment.

[Sammythebest]

I really hate to be making this comment but I feel I need to. People can ignore it a they see fit! Bear in mind that my family have had 4.8k in bank charges taken between sept 08 and march 09.

 

The banks are never going to refund this money, the only talk is regulating in the future...it probably won't happen again. They will have no intention of ever paying a penny back no matter how much legal action is taken.

 

I am not saying this is right , I am just stating a fact.

 

Could regrat posting this just trying to be honest, and I have lost a lot due to this.

[locutus]

Chin up sammy, I think there will be some updates soon that will change your mind. If you take court action and the case is found for you you will get you money back, and court costs.

 

Good luck

[nunnyrose]

signed, and posted on facebook

[Bigredbus]

Cause created on facebook...

 

with both links to the petition on 'Number 10' and 'consumer action group' websites...

 

For those of you who have a 'Facebook' account, the cause can be found under 'Support the thousands of bank charges claimants'... Becoming a member will help circulate the information throughout the web...

 

Link to the 'facebook' cause page: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/407179

Edited November 26, 2009 by Bigredbus

[Sammythebest]

Chin up sammy, I think there will be some updates soon that will change your mind. If you take court action and the case is found for you you will get you money back, and court costs.

 

Good luck

 

 

I do hope your right, I have a case in, but in my head I have written it off. I am sometimes proved wrong, hard to believe I know, and I hope this is one such instance!

 

I am one of the lucky ones I think where we can just stand the loss, I know that is not the same for everyone

[kennyh]

have today requested removal of stay using the template on the site.

 

Phantom - where d'you get it; the site template is currently suspended? I, too, need to apply for a couple

Ken

[Camdenite]

Phantom - where d'you get it; the site template is currently suspended? I, too, need to apply for a couple

Ken

 

Kenny - Take a look at the announcement. Hold fire until further notice in respect of your claim.

 

The templates are "under review"

[emmasot]

I sent a email to lloyds yesterday as i have a claim going through with a company just saying that i was not happy with the result and if they did not pay me up i would carry on with the court prosedingsand this is there reply lol

Dear Mrs Anderson,

Thanks for your email enquiry.

We have not been advised that any changes have been made yet regarding the charges complaints. Once a decision has been made by the OFT, we can then go forward with the complaints.

If there's anything else we can help you with, please let us know.

Many thanks

Brian Jack

Email Support

Lloyds TSB

[alanfromderby]

Thanks Alan. There's absolutely no danger of having our cases struck out in that time is there? I spoke to my CC yesterday regarding a removal of the stay and they recommended moving swiftly as the bank was likely to be requesting all cases be struck off. I'd like to think he was just trying to be helpful, but I'm slightly concerned that the banks are ready to pounce on these stayed claims.

 

I think it would be very foolish for the banks to take that approach before they have considered their position, especially where the claim is clearly under Clause 5. The bank could end up with thousands of wasted cost claims if they try getting a claim dismissed on the basis of a judgement on irrelevant case-law.

 

Actually they do not have to do anything other than sit back and hope that the claimants don't bother to seek the lifting of the stay. A few months down the line the courts will no doubt have a tidying up sessions and dismiss those claims that are still on hold, or the banks will apply en bloc.

 

The other thing to remember is that the courts will be unlikely to process any request from the bank within a couple a weeks. It would no doubt have to be referred to a judge, and that will take probably 6-8 weeks minimum.

[adamski]

Everyone

 

Heed the advice given here lets wait a little while until it calms down and then strike, surprise is the best form of attack

[alanfromderby]

Can someone explain to me why it is that whenever a point of law is decided in favour of the banks it suddenly becomes unimportant, and that the real issue is actually something quite different.

 

Because the OFT went down a different route to that adopted by CAG, MSE, etc, and failed. A judgement in favour of the OFT would have provided a short-cut, but we are effectively now back at the position we were before the OFT were involved. The judgement is more to do with the powers of the OFT, rather than the fairness, or otherwise, of the contracts we have with the banks.

 

The media gave massive publicity to the banks "victory" because they revel in bad news. You watch over the next few weeks as they start to pick up on the real facts, and again jump on the bandwagon of being the consumer champion.

[adamski]

Alan

You are pure class

[InformedSearcher]

'Car2403' - This might sound a really silly question but why did the OFT 'NOT' use those sections?

 

Michael

[landy_alert]

I think it would be very foolish for the banks to take that approach before they have considered their position, especially where the claim is clearly under Clause 5. The bank could end up with thousands of wasted cost claims if they try getting a claim dismissed on the basis of a judgement on irrelevant case-law.

 

Actually they do not have to do anything other than sit back and hope that the claimants don't bother to seek the lifting of the stay. A few months down the line the courts will no doubt have a tidying up sessions and dismiss those claims that are still on hold, or the banks will apply en bloc.

 

The other thing to remember is that the courts will be unlikely to process any request from the bank within a couple a weeks. It would no doubt have to be referred to a judge, and that will take probably 6-8 weeks minimum.

 

Thank you Alan - this is very reassuring and most appreciated!

 

So the info being posted on banks such as LTSB's websites regarding ordering courts top dismiss all claims on hold, you would see as banks scare-mongering in the hope we'll all discontinue our actions and is to be ignored as the pure drivel it obviously is:D

[Camdenite]

I think it would be very foolish for the banks to take that approach before they have considered their position, especially where the claim is clearly under Clause 5. The bank could end up with thousands of wasted cost claims if they try getting a claim dismissed on the basis of a judgement on irrelevant case-law.

 

Actually they do not have to do anything other than sit back and hope that the claimants don't bother to seek the lifting of the stay. A few months down the line the courts will no doubt have a tidying up sessions and dismiss those claims that are still on hold, or the banks will apply en bloc.

 

The other thing to remember is that the courts will be unlikely to process any request from the bank within a couple a weeks. It would no doubt have to be referred to a judge, and that will take probably 6-8 weeks minimum.

 

Thanks Alan. That's reassuring. I guess, like many, I heard the bullish statements from many High St Banks yesterday and feared the worst.

 

Onwards & Upwards.

[The Phantom]

Phantom - where d'you get it; the site template is currently suspended? I, too, need to apply for a couple

Ken

 

There was one yesterday under announcements from alanfromderby

Have to drop off my daughter at Browniees, will post it later

[alanfromderby]

Thank you Alan - this is very reassuring and most appreciated!

 

So the info being posted on banks such as LTSB's websites regarding ordering courts top dismiss all claims on hold, you would see as banks scare-mongering in the hope we'll all discontinue our actions and is to be ignored as the pure drivel it obviously is:D

 

As I say, it would be a very foolish approach without first looking at each individual claim to assess whether the judgement relates to the claim.

 

The courts will clearly have a massive amount of work to do relating to this judgement, so it would seem extremely unlikely that they would be in a position for several weeks to entertain such applications.

 

I imagine the courts will also be waiting for instructions themselves before going ahead with a major strikeout binge - remember the OFT could still seek permission to appeal to Europe, and the situation could change again.

 

Of course, even if a claim was struck out without a hearing it would be a fairly simple process to get it reinstated on the basis that the bank were relying on the wrong case-law.

 

If a court decided to hold a mass strike-out of claims then we would have to seriously consider challenging that, and would be seeking advice from counsel on a challenge.

[PGH7447]

I really hate to be making this comment but I feel I need to. People can ignore it a they see fit! Bear in mind that my family have had 4.8k in bank charges taken between sept 08 and march 09.

 

The banks are never going to refund this money, the only talk is regulating in the future...it probably won't happen again. They will have no intention of ever paying a penny back no matter how much legal action is taken.

 

I am not saying this is right , I am just stating a fact.

 

Could regrat posting this just trying to be honest, and I have lost a lot due to this.

 

I tend to think the same, but it wont stop me being a royal pain the arse to my bank, they have had it easy for far too long

[adamski]

No No

 

If we litigate en-masse like we did in 2006/2007 then they will refund do you think that they will defend every case in person? the logistics are simply to much even for the banks.

[emandcole]

I'd have to disagree. From the legislation the Supreme Court have hinted at it is clear the OFT were in the same copse but simply barking up the wrong tree. The advice from the Judge was actually very encouraging and the arguments contained under regulation 5 makes perfect sense and is entirely applicable to this situation.

 

We need to remember what it was the OFT were asking for - essentially the banks were questioning the authority of the OFT to get involved at a certain level and unfortunately with the legal argument the OFT pursued the Supreme Court had to make that decision. The actual issue of charges being fair was never even part of this hearing, that would have come later on had the OFT won the case and been able to determine the true cost to the banks, thus triggering a refund of the surplus amounts taken.

 

The new argument we can all soon bring is actually far more potent and direct, the banks as far as I can see will have a harder time of defending this particular condition of the UTCCR. We most certainly have many options still open to us and rest assured they will be explored.

[InformedSearcher]

Well if people start to apply to courts en-masse it'll come full circle. That was one of the reasons in 2007 - The courts could not cope. Courts work on budgets and are not geared up for mass applications of this nature.

Michael

[adamski]

Michael

 

Exactly my point

[adamski]

they think we are going to go away and from the comments on here and other forums I think people are just going to go away which is what the banks and the goverment and the courts want, thats half the problem with this country no one has any fight left in them its just eaiser to lie down and accept it.