Jump to content


why wont the banks just give in.


mojo8
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5475 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

Even if they gave up the initial litigation stage, the second stage may be as long. The banks have used their legal right to appeal which is a good thing.

.

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

There is so much at stake that it is not a surprise.

What concerns me is the number of M'Luds who sit a directors with these banks but who do not in any way whatsoever have any conflict of interest.

 

Just in the same way that the director of the PCC also, err, owns a certain newspaper!

Link to post
Share on other sites

......didn't everyone say that about the Master of Rolls and his two fellow judges. What verdict did they produce?

 

Banks lost. I would be surprised if the Law Lords would want to contradict their own judgement which was heavily quoted in both Justice Smith's verdict and the Court of Appeal.

 

Furthermore, they will have a conflict of interest because they all will have a bank account but that doesn't mean that because of this that they cannot interpret the law as laid down in statute.

.

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

House of Lords - Register of Lords' Interests

 

There are no listed interests, but that does not exclude actual interests, direct or indirect.

 

My main concern, which i should have said from the start, is the interference of Government in Lords affairs (see for example Lockerbie) and the increasing interest of other Lords that may affect decisions.

 

There is little reason why the banks should win this one. But I just have this feeling that some deicision will be made that would not normally be expected. I hope I am wrong (for a change :D)

Link to post
Share on other sites

House of Lords - Register of Lords' Interests

 

There are no listed interests, but that does not exclude actual interests, direct or indirect.

These are Law Lords not politically affiliated Lords.

My main concern, which i should have said from the start, is the interference of Government in Lords affairs (see for example Lockerbie) and the increasing interest of other Lords that may affect decisions.

That was scottish law on a terrorist bombing of a Pan Am flight. That is really not comaparable.

There is little reason why the banks should win this one. But I just have this feeling that some deicision will be made that would not normally be expected. I hope I am wrong (for a change :D)

 

Which LAW Lord has questionable links as that list of members interests show no directorships of banks OR financial institutions.

.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...