Jump to content


freakyleaky

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

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3427 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

How come the templates here are based on Regulation 5 and the OFT lawyers did not even take the point, not even in the alternative.

 

I understand it is easy to blame the lawyers if we are unsuccessful, but the OFT lawyers for missing this must be monkeys.


If I have been helpful please click on my star and add a comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hang on that crap that lloyds have put on their website simply says that the charges cannot be assesed for fairness, if the contract was never negotiated then the contract in its whole would be deemed unfair therefore all terms within would be seen as unfair.

 

 

Just a question with regards to the misleading info that the banks are placing on their websites, with rgards to the test case outcome.... could this be challenged under the Advertising standards Authority.... ie giving out misleading info ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well lloyds have said that the court has agreed that under utccr we are unable to claim our charges back , this is crap because the case was lost on an argument that conflicts with other clauses within utccr so the oft were always doomed-simple as however under other utccr regs there are clauses that would allow us to mount a challenge, im sure they are not silly enough to think that its over, however under advertising law i doubt this would be classed as advertising

Edited by robnfc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well abbey have just informed me that my case is on hold and she will call me next week to discuss further, so what is actually happening now??

 

she also said they were stunned they won, you can imagine my response cant you......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well the stay has been lifted so nothing is on hold in the view of the courts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

she said that there are people specifically looking at all the financial hardship cases so im holding a little hope....for now anyway.....OFT need to step on the gas again me thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can this Country get any worse!!!

 

Somebody needs to get some Balls and deal with these so called banks!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well the case doesnt really change things alot , basically we can no longer use the oft as they cannot rule on the "fairness" and we cannot claim back charges using the utccr argument that they are penalties as the court ruled they are classed as a service and therefore not open to challenge.

 

So we use a different utccr reg ie 5 and 8 read this:

 

 

 

The Consumer Forums - Announcements in Forum : OFT Test Case Updates and Discussion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See this post from the Mods I think all who have claims nbeed to amend their POCS without delay and all who have not claimed claim now

The POC's have now been amended.

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resour...-now-available


Lloyds TSB (SARS) request sent 9th June 2006

£2191 Moneyclaim Issued 11/08/2006, Acknowleded 17th August Defence 14 Sep, AQ returned 5/10/2006.SETTLED IN FULL £2,670 26/11/2006/ Lloyds Credit Card SETTLED IN FULL £267

MBNA SETTLED IN FULL 15/09/2006 £829

Citicard (SARS) request sent 22nd June 2006 Moneyclaim issued 19th Sep, Defence and AQ received 5/10/2006, AQ returned 5/10/2006, part refund received 10/10/2006

GE MONEY SETTLLED IN FULL £400

Barclaycard Me and Mrs SARS sent 19/10/2006 settled £350

Welcome Finance PPI 2 accounts one settled £1018 waiting on other

GE Money PPI 1 account settled 8/5/2008 £560 2nd account SETTLED IN FULL £3,599.78p 15thAugust 2008

Lloyds TSB PPI CC complaint sent 10/04/2008

Black Horse PPI with FOS 20/05/2008

HFC PPI complaint sent 22/05/2008

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes As I understand it the only ruling made by the so called Supreme court is that the OFT do not have the power to investigate bank charges in terms of fairness. This does not mean that they are lawfull, indeed they still fall fowl of UTCCR, and common law states penalty charges in contratcs are not allowed, only a recovery of real expenses .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about credit card charges? how do they differ legally from bank charges?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the court has ruled that these are not classed as penalties they are classed as a service which we pay for therefore can not be challenged under the fairness rule hence reg 5 and 8 now being used for POC , as for credit cards this wont make any difference as this case has no bearing on credit cards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK,

Ive not got a claim in court (Im in Scotland) but my claim resides with RBS who have kindly posted this announcement on their website:

 

 

Summary

On 25 November 2009 the Supreme Court ruled that the level of unarranged overdraft charges in personal current accounts cannot be assessed for fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCR). The Court decided that current account customers receive a package of services and unarranged overdraft charges are part of the price paid by customers in exchange for that package.

 

The judgment focused on the banks’ current terms but the banks and the OFT have agreed that the judgment should apply also to historic terms.

 

Earlier hearings established none of RBS’s terms was capable of constituting a penalty clause.

 

RBS and the other banks involved in the test case are currently in discussions with the FSA and the Office of Fair Trading (‘OFT’) as to whether, following the Supreme Court judgment, there remain any outstanding issues requiring resolution.

 

We will publish further information here as soon as we receive it.

 

Test Case Background

On 27 July 2007 the Office of Fair Trading (‘OFT’), seven UK banks, including RBS, and one building society (‘the Banks’) started a court case to resolve certain issues regarding the fairness and legality of unarranged overdraft charges. This has become known as the ‘test case’. This is a complex area of law on which there is limited guidance; it is therefore important for the issues to be properly and fully examined. The Banks believe that the charges are both lawful and fair and that the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (‘UTCCR’) do not apply to these types of charges.

 

The first phase of the test case was heard in January and February 2008 in the High Court in London, with judgment being issued in April 2008.

 

In summary:

 

The Court decided that the current charges are not penalties.

The Judge also found that the Banks' current terms are sufficiently clear to enable the typical consumer to have a proper understanding of them for sensible and practical purposes.

The Judge found that the terms and conditions relating to unarranged overdraft charges are assessable for fairness under the UTCCR. However, the Judge was explicit in stating that this does not mean they are unfair; he was not asked to rule on whether the Banks' terms were fair.

The Banks appealed the decision that unarranged overdraft fees are assessable for fairness under the UTCCR. The appeal hearing took place in the autumn of 2008. The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in February 2009 reaching the same decision as the High Court, although for slightly different reasons. The Banks applied for and received permission to appeal this decision to the House of Lords (now called Supreme Court). This hearing concluded on 25 June 2009 and the judgment of the Supreme Court was handed down on 25 November 2009.

 

A short hearing took place in July 2008 to consider whether terms and conditions previously used by the Banks were capable of being penalties and in October 2008, the High Court issued its judgment in relation to this part of the test case. The Court invited RBS to make further submissions in relation to some of the terms and conditions previously used by it. Following a further hearing in December 2008, the Court issued its decision in January 2009. It found that all RBS terms considered were incapable of being a penalty.

 

All judgments in the test case are available via Judgments - Abbey National - Office of Fair Trading.

 

1. What will happen to customer complaints about unarranged overdraft charges?

RBS and the other banks involved in the test case are currently in discussions with the regulators to ensure that the outstanding customer complaints are brought to a swift conclusion. Once these matters have been finalised we will write to all affected customers to advise them of how we will resolve their complaint

 

2. What will happen to my court claim for a refund now?

Most county court cases have now been stayed, i.e. the county courts have decided that no further action should be taken in respect of them at this stage, while the test case proceeds. These stays have been put in place because the test case will give important guidance to the county courts as to how they should approach individual consumer cases as a matter of legal principle. It is important that all county courts adopt similar approaches to ensure fairness between claimants.

 

3. What will happen to customer complaints made through the Financial Ombudsman Service in the meantime?

We are currently in discussion with the regulators to ensure that customers are dealt with on a consistent basis in line with the judgment from the Supreme Court. For further information and updates please check the FOS website - Financial Ombudsman Service

 

4. What will happen next in the test case?

As the Supreme Court has found that RBS’s unarranged overdraft charges cannot be assessed for fairness under the UTCCR the test case proceedings are now concluded. RBS and the other banks involved in the test case are currently in discussions with the regulators to ensure that any outstanding matters are brought to a swift conclusion.

 

5. How long will it take until customer cases are finally resolved?

At this stage, it is impossible to say. The Banks are working closely with the regulators to understand how we can most appropriately and swiftly apply the Court’s decision to individual customer cases.

 

6. I am in financial difficulty - what can I do?

If you have financial problems, come and talk to us, and we will try to help you solve them. Depending on your circumstances, we could set regular or fixed repayments for debts, or we could reduce or suspend your repayments for a certain period.

 

If you have a more serious debt problem, we will work with you and put you in touch with organisations that offer help and advice to sort out your repayments and overcome your difficulties.

 

If you feel you need independent financial advice, we will be happy to direct you to someone, or to work with your chosen adviser.

 

The sooner you come to us, the more likely it is that we will be able to help.

 

7. Where can I find out more?

We will update this page with any developments in the proceedings.

 

You can contact us by calling on 0845 3030 442. Lines are open 9.00am-5.00pm Monday to Friday or 9.00am-1.00pm Saturday.

 

Alternatively you can find out more at the following websites:

 

The Financial Services Authority

The Office of Fair Trading

The Financial Ombudsman Service

Judiciary website

BBA press release

 

Can i take it that they will probably send me a letter telling me Im getting nothing?.

If so, Can I claim by other means either in court or FOS bearing in mind Im in Scotland?

 

Thanks for any advice


27th April - Requested Statements

13th May - Received Statements:D

15th May - Preliminary request for £4780 sent.:D

16th May - Royal Mail confirm Letter received.:D

23rd May - Received Letter considering claim. :grin:

30th May - Letter Before Action sent. :D

10th July - Times Up!! FOS claim going in.

16th July - Measly 30% of claim offered as goodwill

17th July - Rejected offer letter sent

25th July - Acknowledgement of Reject Letter received

26th July - Screwed over by the OFT,Banks, FSA & FOS all in one go.:evil:

Never even felt it happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why are the media stating very different things to the people on here?


Only direct action by the masses will work....

 

Look at all successes they have never come from negotiation!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the court has ruled that these are not classed as penalties they are classed as a service which we pay for therefore can not be challenged under the fairness rule hence reg 5 and 8 now being used for POC , as for credit cards this wont make any difference as this case has no bearing on credit cards

Credit Cards charges have always been unlawful and never argued to be fair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See this post from the Mods I think all who have claims nbeed to amend their POCS without delay and all who have not claimed claim now

Quote:

The POC's have now been amended.

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resour...-now-available

I have just been told that the existing POC's will stand up, the changes are only minor and wont effect your claim.

Lex


Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just emailed my bank and put them on notice they have 14 days to refund the charges or my court claim will proceed


PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are trying to blag ppl into thinking that all is lost which we now know is crap , just ignore what banks are putting on their websites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do i wait to hear back from abbey in next few days or do i take action of any sort? dont know whats best.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok this sounds great actually.

 

Dose this mean cases wont be stayed now?:)


Any typos spelling mistakes are due to leprechauns in my keyboard they move the letters around sometimes (edited for bookworm god bless her sole) Deep Peace be with you.

 

“I would say to the House as I said to those who have joined this government: I have

nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the

most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of

suffering.

 

You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs —

Victory in spite of all terror — Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for

without victory there is no survival.”

 

(Winston Churchill Addressing the House of commons.)

 

All complaints go to the lootube. All conversations go in the white box then you click submit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

................

Edited by robnfc
.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PGH...what exactly did you write, im going to do the same with abbey now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
according to the fsa all stays should be lifted as the case is over

 

Careful. The only thing that's been lifted is the waiver enabling banks to not deal with complaints. Claims are stayed in the courts and as I understand it they won't be automatically lifted. The Announcements section includes a template letter that each claimant should submit asking for their stay to be lifted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apologise ill remove that statement , just heard on sky about the fsa saying that if there is no case to answer anymore so there will be no need for the stay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...