Jump to content


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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4076 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I think all these appeals and 'phases' are to get the matter decided, legally, for once and for all. The Judges are not 'pro' bank at all, they are 'pro' law.

 

To come out half cock will be no good to anyone.

 

15th April the banks have to have their petition to appeal in, then I think 6 weeks for all the paperwork, so its definately going to be end of MAY before any dates can be set. The HoL thus far have dealt with it quickly, they have their breaks tho which will slow the next bit up, and we know the banks won't rush.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Please allow me to sum up.....

The banks are charging us causing hardship and distress we fight back and are blocked by a government institution which is "Helping us".

This institution takes so long, the banks stuff up the whole economy so the gov has to use our money to bail most of them out!

As punishment the chief banker who caused most of the problems for his bank gets told off and sent home with a £703000 a year pension.

we are now faced with the situation of the government sueing it's self!

I lost my business due to this mess. Yesterday I was 12p short on a cheque and have just been charged £35.

is that about right? anyone else feel a bit bitter over this?

 

The soloution. Have our gov get some balls, force the banks it controls to lower their charges. The others will follow along as soon as people start leaving them.

Once this has been done stop the action and use the money saved on both sides to pay back the charges to the people. Simples.

 

what do you think?

Edited by buck rogers
forgot the full stops in my rant!!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please allow me to sum up.....

The banks are charging us causing hardship and distress we fight back and are blocked by a government institution which is Helping us(what are you talking about? OFT?). this institution takes so long the banks stuff up the whole economy so the gov has to use our money to bail most of them out! as punishment the chief banker who caused most of the problems for his bank gets told off and sent home with a £7003000 a year pension.

we are now faced with the situation of the government sueing its self!(The OFT is suing banks' and not all of them have government shareholding so are privately owned banks)

and i lost my business due to this mess was 12p short on a cheque yesterday and have just been charged £35.

is that about right anyone else feel a bit bitter over this?(nope)

 

The soloution. Have our gov get some balls force the banks it controls to lower their charges(which the OFT did with Credit Cards and what happened? People continue to sue banks through the courts. Do you want a solution that is viable long term or a short termed solution that takes you back to the start again?) the others will follow along soon as people start leaving them. once this has been done stop the action and use the money saved on both sides to pay back the charges to the people. Simples.

Fair enough, we'll have £12 set as the limit and I am sure everyone on CAG will not sue their banks. Right?

what do you think?

 

I think I know where you are coming from but it is unworkable.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it wont work its not the point really. Its just showing how little we all mean down here and if you think any different then im jelous. What are the odds of the dicision going our way honestly. It would cost the banks and in turn now the goverment millions/billions. it would bankrupt the country. The mess is farcical caused bu the people behind closed door and will be handled by people behind closed doors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well not posted for a long time fed up of all this now to be honest but still log in from time to time to see what happening i am one of those who was due to be paid in july 07 and then got stayed

 

so to make sure i am upto date on all the different happenings

 

1) andrew smith ruled current charges not penalties but are subject to ucctr

 

2) banks appealed

 

3) andrew smith then went on to rule that historical terms are generally subject to ucctr and not penalties (Except for a couple of banks)

 

4)banks appeal on current terms conditons was heard beggining of feb in appeal courts and they lost and basically refused right to appeal to house of lords

 

5)Banks requested to house of lords for right to appeal their right for an Appeal in the house of lords

 

6) this was granted and they now have until 15th april 2009 to have submissions into the house of lords for why they have the right to appeal

 

7)meantime the OFT have to employ more than one person half a day a week :lol::lol: to now actually try and summatize what a fair charge would be for the banks to charge in these matters (and to alieviate the pressure on this poor person are reducing it down to just 3 of the banks infarstructure

 

 

Question on point 3 as all my charges will come under historical terms due to the miracuriously coincidental JULY 07 rewrite of TOC's has this point been appealed by the banks if so what is the state of play and what are the next dates to watch out for in this part of the saga

 

not trying to be smart mouthed or anything else

 

In 06 when i started my claims i was very read up on here and other places for what was going on now i struggle to just keep abreast of what our next delay date is to be and exactly what the state of play is

 

Thank you in advance for any responses to my post

MY CASE

 

Newbody Vs Abbey

 

NB: Please read the FAQs & step-by-step instructions thoroughly & completely before commencing any action

 

the following is a link to a web archive of abbey websites over the time click on month under year to access Abbey's site for that time period to get what the terms and conditions were for when you opened your account Internet Archive Wayback Machine hope it helps or here for where i have started to pull them out to http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/91707-archives-abbeys-web-pages.html

 

Advice & opinions given by me are my views or how i would respond, and are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group & are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions & actions are your own - if in any doubt, seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will reply to this as a 'layman'. I see it as the slow rolling rules of law that should have vanished 50 yerars ago. We have instant access to so much these days so why not law?

A perfect example is my mother dying last year. We cremated her in late July but I never received probate for almost 4 months. I was the sole living reletive too! It was in fact little but I tell you the funeral directors and solicitors took their share fast!

Things run way too slowly these days. It's only the judiciary lagging behind it would seem! C'mon almost 2 years to come to ... NO final decision!

Michael

When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is. (Oscar Wilde)

--I like to be helpful wherever possible however I'm not qualified in this field. I do consider carefully anything important (normally from personal experience) however please understand that any actions taken are at your own risk--

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will reply to this as a 'layman'. I see it as the slow rolling rules of law that should have vanished 50 yerars ago. We have instant access to so much these days so why not law?

A perfect example is my mother dying last year. We cremated her in late July but I never received probate for almost 4 months. I was the sole living reletive too! It was in fact little but I tell you the funeral directors and solicitors took their share fast!

Things run way too slowly these days. It's only the judiciary lagging behind it would seem! C'mon almost 2 years to come to ... NO final decision!

Michael

 

I think the problem is that there are thousands and thousands of cases in the court system. Adequate time has to be given for a case to be heard. For example, the UTCCR 1999 is about European Law so it is on very minute terms of reference. The first parts of the cases involved legal teams from both sides and skeleton arguments as well. Justice Smith for example, had about 20 or 30 binders of information. We are moving faster forward now IMHO.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys,

 

Can anyone help with this query. Two of my friends are going through a divorce at the current time. They commenced a claim for the recovery of their bank charges on a joint account. I am assuming as their is joint liability then any payouts would be to both of them too. However obviously when the divorce comes through they wont be Mr. and Mrs. anymore so would the bank, if the time comes, pay any refund half and half to each of them equally?

 

Thanks.

 

TheyrCriminals

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys,

 

Can anyone help with this query. Two of my friends are going through a divorce at the current time. They commenced a claim for the recovery of their bank charges on a joint account. I am assuming as their is joint liability then any payouts would be to both of them too. However obviously when the divorce comes through they wont be Mr. and Mrs. anymore so would the bank, if the time comes, pay any refund half and half to each of them equally?

 

Thanks.

 

TheyrCriminals

 

Gotta say that I don't know the answer to this one. I think they would refund to one of the parties but again that is a guess. I would get them to write to the bank and ask and then post here(so we all know if it comes up again).

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

My worry is that the government think it is in their interest NOT to pay back the charges as this would put a hole in the money they have bailed some of the banks out with.

Also a decent/reasonable profit on future charges ensures that their ''stakehold'' in some of the banks is more sound.

 

My guess anyway

pre lim letter sent 4/07/06

lba sent 18/07/06

N1 served 2rd Aug.

Paid in full Aug 15th

Checked account today 16th !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, we'll have £12 set as the limit and I am sure everyone on CAG will not sue their banks. Right?

We ARE still using the basic argument that OFT can fix whatever figure they like (as with the CC companies)-Yes ? But we then deploy the argument that OFT word is NOT law and then invite the offending parties to "show and tell" which, of course they don't. This remains the case - yes?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We ARE still using the basic argument that OFT can fix whatever figure they like (as with the CC companies)-Yes ? But we then deploy the argument that OFT word is NOT law and then invite the offending parties to "show and tell" which, of course they don't. This remains the case - yes?

sort of.

 

£12 is the limit that would cause action against the cc company, that's all. It is not a level that is deemed to be fair.

 

therefore you can still argue that £12 is too much.

 

 

HSBC WON three times!!!!! Read about my continuing battle (claim FOUR!) Link HERE

Capital One WON Link

HERE

GE capital (5 accounts) WON link HERE

Lloyds bank account WON second claim starting! link HERE

Budget insurance cough up WON link HERE

Principles WON link HERE

A&L (Mrs Crusher's account) claim link HERE

Barclays claim link HERE

 

Any advice given is on an informal basis only and without prejudice or liability. In in any doubt, consult a qualified lawyer.

IF YOU HAVE GOT YOUR MONEY BACK, PUT SOME BACK INTO THE SITE TO HELP KEEP IT OPEN!

Link to post
Share on other sites

We ARE still using the basic argument that OFT can fix whatever figure they like (as with the CC companies)-Yes ? But we then deploy the argument that OFT word is NOT law and then invite the offending parties to "show and tell" which, of course they don't. This remains the case - yes?

The OFT figure was always going to be a temporary measure. I suspect that they will relook at this on the conclusion of the OFT test case issues. The Law, as you have said, is the Law.

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seen this on HSBC website. Sorry if it's already been posted.

 

Latest Update: 3 April 2009

 

The OFT has announced the next phase of its ongoing enquiry into overdraft fees. To streamline and potentially shorten the enquiry, which was commenced in March 2007, the OFT has decided to look at a representative sample of three UK banks current account terms and conditions, including those of HSBC.

The OFT has made it clear that the selection of the three banks is not to be seen as an indictment of these banks - they are purely representative of the different terms and conditions that exist among the many banks and building societies that offer current accounts and overdrafts in the UK.

HSBC welcomes this initiative and we will continue to cooperate fully and constructively to the ongoing enquiry.

The OFT enquiry investigation is running in parallel with the high court test case. Within this the banks have just been granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords regarding assessing terms and conditions for fairness, and will progress the appeal as quickly as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT enquiry investigation is running in parallel with the high court test case. Within this the banks have just been granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords regarding assessing terms and conditions for fairness, and will progress the appeal as quickly as possible.

I took that seriously until I saw that last bit:D:shock:

HALIFAX: 13/01/07 Sent S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) letter (marked as rec'd 16/01)

Paid in full in March 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seen this on HSBC website. Sorry if it's already been posted.

 

Latest Update: 3 April 2009

 

The OFT has announced the next phase of its ongoing enquiry into overdraft fees. To streamline and potentially shorten the enquiry, which was commenced in March 2007, the OFT has decided to look at a representative sample of three UK banks current account terms and conditions, including those of HSBC.

The OFT has made it clear that the selection of the three banks is not to be seen as an indictment of these banks - they are purely representative of the different terms and conditions that exist among the many banks and building societies that offer current accounts and overdrafts in the UK.

HSBC welcomes this initiative and we will continue to cooperate fully and constructively to the ongoing enquiry.

The OFT enquiry investigation is running in parallel with the high court test case. Within this the banks have just been granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords regarding assessing terms and conditions for fairness, and will progress the appeal as quickly as possible.

 

My opinion, should you want it, (those that don't can go "back" and read the next subbed thread without causing offence) is that this should be welcomed.

 

Imagine the further delay if all the T&C's had to be considered - this way, a "pilot" will be done to test the waters.

 

The only issue will be where the other Banks don't accept the analysis of the "pilot"/"water testing" and challenge their own, end-to-end.

 

Of course, though, this is a warning salvo to the Banks that the OFT will not accept any unacceptable delay - I mean, how can these Banks justify not complying with the investigation and still say they want it dealt with as quickly as possible.

 

In my case, all I want the OFT to do is be ready to release their findings/decisions when this darn Test Case outcome is known.

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only issue will be where the other Banks don't accept the analysis of the "pilot"/"water testing" and challenge their own, end-to-end.

 

That's OK 'Car' - then one of us can 'invite' them to court for a 'show & tell' session!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason the Banks dont want the OFT to test the fairness is because they know they will lose and even if the 12.00 fee is agreed -it still wont be statute and so could still leave the doors open to carry on with the claim.

Interestingly we have seen default fees come down to as low as £8.00 now.

Even Business charges have seen amazing change;RBS have agreed to freeze all business charges for a year.

The fee for an unpaid cheque or unpaid standing order on a Barclays business account is now £2.00

I remember this costing up to £39.50 with their added little extras.

Their excuse that its now so low ?????

"We have managed to improve our processing and handling systems " Ha Ha what a joke-but interesting that these figures were introduced around the same time as they changed the wording of their Terms and Conditions to include the word "RETAIL".

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fee for an unpaid cheque or unpaid standing order on a Barclays business account is now £2.00
Wasn't sure where you got that from Martin.

 

I presume you have misinterpreted

Cheques returned to you unpaid £2
which actually refers to
Cheques returned to you unpaid – This is where a cheque is paid into your account which is returned unpaid by the drawer’s bank.
Barclays Business Accounts are still charging £30 odd

 

If there are insufficient funds in your account when we receive

cheques or other items for payment, it is within our discretion

whether the payment is processed. If we do, you will incur a

Paid Referral Fee of £30. This will only be charged when the

unauthorised overdraft is more than £30 and on each occasion

it increases by more than £30. We understand that we all make

the odd mistake and as such we won’t charge the first Paid

Referral Fee in each charging quarter. The interest rate for

unauthorised borrowings, including those within the £30 buffer

zone, is charged at 29.5 per cent a year. Additionally, if an item

is returned unpaid due to there being insufficient funds in your

account, we will charge you an Unpaid Fee of £35 for each

such payment, which is our fee for having considered whether

to process such payment.

http://www.business.barclays.co.uk/BBB/A/Content/Files/P59204_Barclays_tarriffs.pdf

 

If not and they have reduced their unauth charges to £2 then that would be fantastic news.

Edited by yourbank

.

FSA Waiver on Bank Charges:http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Doing/Regulated/Notify/Waiver/pdf/dir_quart_0709.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...