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

[brown1950]

'Mail on Sunday' today says OFT Test Case decision now delayed until July 08.

[brown1950]

And we have until July 08 for the Judge to decide !

[brown1950]

Yes it was agreed the Banks would be given advance warning of the Judge's decision.

[brown1950]

Herewith latest news from the BBC :-

 

 

The High Court is hearing the latest stage of the case into the fairness of bank overdraft charges, by studying historic contracts.

Judge Mr Andrew Justice Smith will determine whether charges going back for years can be challenged.

The banks are set to appeal against his first ruling - that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) can assess whether fees are unfair - by the end of 2008.

The current hearing is expected to last for three days.

Significant case

The OFT has been seeking legal confirmation that it can rule if bank overdraft charges of up to £35 are fair or not.

Eight banks, which provide about 90% of the UK's current accounts, have been keen to oppose this to protect the estimated £3.5bn a year of income they generate from charging customers who go overdrawn without permission.

Under pressure from hundreds of thousands of customers suing them for the return of their overdraft charges in the county courts, banks agreed to a High Court test case in two stages.

The first was on the authority of the OFT under consumer contract regulations. The second will be on the fairness of the charges themselves, which the OFT has been investigating since April 2007.

Tens of thousands of claims for the refund of bank charges have been frozen in the county courts since the test case was agreed.

Looking back

The current High Court hearing relates to whether overdraft charges levied historically can be assessed for fairness by the OFT.

The latest High Court hearing is expected to last for three days

 

 

The judge's initial decision - that the OFT did have the authority to consider fairness, which is being appealed against by the banks - only relates to current agreements between the banks and their customers.

The current hearing will consider fees from the banks' old terms and conditions for current accounts.

Meanwhile, the OFT is continuing its investigation into the fairness of overdraft fees and is expected to offer the banks its "preliminary views" by the end of July. The entire legal process is expected to last several more months.

[brown1950]

Just to remind people the Court isn't sitting today and resumes again on Monday through to Thursday.

[brown1950]

Extract from the OFT website :-

 

Personal current accounts - UTCCRs investigation and test case

 

The personal current accounts market study provides the context for the OFT's Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (UTCCRs) investigation into the fairness of the level and application of unarranged overdraft charges.

The High Court test case, which is a key part of the investigation, is seeking to establish the preliminary legal principle of whether the provisions of the UTCCRs that deal with unfairness apply. It is also addressing the additional point of law of whether the charges can amount to penalties at common law.

 

Below is a timeline of this work.

5 December 2008

 

There will be a hearing at the High Court at 09:30 on 9 December to deal with further submissions from Abbey, Lloyds and RBSG relating to whether some of their historical charging terms are capable of amounting to penalties at common law.

[brown1950]

Banks have lodged petition with HOL for the right to appeal !

[brown1950]

Two Labour peers face suspension

 

 

Four Labour peers met undercover reporters posing as lobbyists

 

Two Labour peers face suspension from Parliament for six months after being found guilty of misconduct. Ex-trade minister Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor of Blackburn were accused by the Sunday Times of being willing to change laws in exchange for cash.

The two men denied the allegations but they now face sanctions following a probe by a House of Lords Committee.

Labour's leader in the House of Lords had described the allegations against them as "very serious".

Parliamentary vote

The Lords Privileges Committee has recommended the two men be suspended from the House for up to six months after an investigation into allegations made against four Labour peers.

The final decision on their fate will rest with the House of Lords itself, which will vote on whether to exclude them - possibly as early as next week.

Two other Labour peers - the former minister Lord Moonie and Lord Snape - were cleared of wrongdoing, but invited to make apologies to the Lords for showing an "inappropriate attitude" to parliamentary rules banning paid advocacy.

The BBC's political correspondent Gillian Hargreaves said it was exceptionally rare for members of the Upper House to be suspended, the last case of its kind being in the 17th Century.

The Sunday Times alleged the two peers were prepared to change proposed legislation while it was passing through the Lords in return for money - which would have been in clear breach of parliamentary rules.

These rules state that peers should not seek to influence legislation in return for money.

The Sunday Times released details of secretly recorded conversations Lord Truscott and Lord Taylor had with their reporters in which they discussed what help they might give them and how parliamentary procedure worked.

The two men maintained they had never discussed taking money in return for tabling amendments to legislation.

Baroness Royall, Labour leader in the Lords, vowed to get to the bottom of the allegations, the latest in a series of recent scandals to have damaged the integrity of Parliament.

The police decided not to mount a criminal investigation into the case earlier this year, citing the difficulty of obtaining evidence among other factors.

 

Are you thinking what I'm thinking ?

[brown1950]

i really dont think we gonna get our money back tbh with all the money trouble that going on and i am sick of waiting to hear something i bin waiting 2 years now and well for wot?

how long is this gonna be dragged out?

 

 

Another 2 years ?

[brown1950]

The banks must have thought they had won the lottery the day all employers started paying wages by BACS..

 

 

I agree with your comment.Oh for the Thursday night pay packet in cash which never went near a bank !