Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3882 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

read in the news that the lawyer or barrister working for the banks has said that the charges the banks levi onto customers do not have to be fair as they subsidise people who stay in the black! He must think this is a fair comment to come out with in court! What planet is he on. The poor keeping the rich, making the poor poorer and the rich richer, How can he justify this statement :|

Edited by hilaryfrances

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem to be waffling Hilary, they do that when pushed into a corner.


Some useful links.

FAQ's

Making Posts

Letter Template Library

Bank Contact Details

AQ Guide to Completion

Court Fees

Data Protection non Compliance

Witness Statements for Court Bundle

Banking Code Website

Limitations Act

Fast Track Costs

A-Z Index

Mis-Claim Tutorial

Step By Step Instructions

 

Remember: The Ark was built by amateurs-The Titanic by professionals.

 

Please click my scales if you find my advice helpful !

 

If your claim is successful, please donate 5% so that it can continue to help others.

 

Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

 

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

YOU CAN NOW COMPLAIN TO THE OFT ABOUT THEIR CONDUCT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR TRADING REGULATIONS 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are now threatening (if they lose the case) to charge for having a current account. They stated that the charges they have applied in the past was enabling them to give out free current accounts.

 

The lowest of the low.:mad:


 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The toys being thrown out already. . . let them charge, they will fight amongst themselves when one bank allows free banking.


Some useful links.

FAQ's

Making Posts

Letter Template Library

Bank Contact Details

AQ Guide to Completion

Court Fees

Data Protection non Compliance

Witness Statements for Court Bundle

Banking Code Website

Limitations Act

Fast Track Costs

A-Z Index

Mis-Claim Tutorial

Step By Step Instructions

 

Remember: The Ark was built by amateurs-The Titanic by professionals.

 

Please click my scales if you find my advice helpful !

 

If your claim is successful, please donate 5% so that it can continue to help others.

 

Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

WARNING TO ALL

Please be aware of acting on advice given by PM .Anyone can make mistakes and if advice is given on the main forum people can see it to correct it ,if given privately then no one can see it to correct it. Please also be aware of giving your personal details to strangers

 

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

YOU CAN NOW COMPLAIN TO THE OFT ABOUT THEIR CONDUCT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FROM UNFAIR TRADING REGULATIONS 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I dont see why we should not pay, they will have to be competitve, and sharing the true cost of banking amonst everyone is a lot fairer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They started to apply charges for using ATM's. When people started to boycott those that charged in our area they very quickly went back to no charge on the ATM's.

 

dpick


cannot find it A to Z

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/consumer-forums-website-questions/53182-cant-find-what-youre.html

 

 

Halifax :D

Paid in full £2295

 

MBNA:mad: 20/03/2008 settled in full out of court

 

Capital One:D

07/07/2007 Capital one charges paid in full £1666

19/01/2008 recovered PPI £2216 + costs

 

Littlewoods :-D

12/08/2007 write off £1176.10 debt.

 

JD Williams charges refunded in full £640

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no need to charge, its just PURE GREED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banks face an "appalling prospect" if the Office of Trading is allowed to rule that overdraft charges are unfair, the House of Lords has been told. The banks would receive a deluge of litigation if the decision was made against them, the court has heard.

Five Law Lords are hearing an appeal by seven banks and one building society against judgements by two lower courts.

The lenders are challenging the right of the Office of Fair Trading to decide if overdraft charges are fair or not.

Prices

Jonathan Sumption QC, for the banks, said if the previous ruling in favour of the OFT was upheld, the banks would face a deluge of litigation with claims going back many years.

 

o.gifTHE STORY SO FAR...

Nearly a million people have claimed for the return of their unauthorised overdraft charges but their cases are on hold

If the banks win this week's appeal, these people are unlikely to get any money back

If the banks lose, then the legal arguments should move on to a key stage - a case to determine whether these charges were fair or not

Only then will people have a clearer picture as to whether billions of pounds will be handed back to customers

 

inline_dashed_line.gif

 

Crunch time for bank charges case

 

 

"That prospect is appalling," he said.

He said if the courts upheld the right of the OFT to scrutinise bank charges, then the charges might be deemed unenforceable for a time period dating all the way back to the 1990s.

That was because European Union regulations on unfair terms in consumer contracts had been introduced into UK law during that decade.

Alternatively, Mr Sumption argued, all personal current account contracts might become unenforceable in total.

At the core of the arguments is whether bank charges are exempt from the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations (UTCCR) and whether the OFT can scrutinise or regulate the charges.

Mr Sumption argued that the price being paid by bank customers for the use of their overdrawn accounts was not something that fell under the above regulations.

"Does our case allow extortionate prices? Yes," he said.

"The remedy for extortionate prices lies in the domain of competition regulations, not in the domain of contract regulations."

'Consumer categories'

Mr Geoffrey Vos QC, for the Nationwide Building Society, supported the arguments of the banks.

In particular, he said, the Court of Appeal had been wrong in law to analyse the impact of overdraft charges from the point of view of consumers who stayed in the black.

 

_45958073_jex_390924_de32-1.jpg The banks have been outlining their case

 

 

He pointed out that of 54 million current account holders, 12.6 million paid overdraft fees in any one year.

That meant there were at least two categories of consumer - those who paid and those who did not pay overdraft fees.

"The typical consumer is one who pays, intends to pay, or expects to pay debit charges," said Mr Vos.

"The charges are clearly recognisable as the price for this service for the debit customers."

So, Mr Vos argued, the bank charges were necessarily exempt from the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations (UTCCR) and the OFT could not scrutinise or regulate them.

The hearing is expected to continue until Thursday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:mad:poor souls what about the appalling levels of worry and debt that they have caused Joe public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if I commit genocide and kill the half of the UK's population I will get away with it because there would be too many cases.

 

I think this argument is flawed :)

 

I have always said I would welcome banking with reasonable open charges, we do not have "free banking" now most people pay in one form or another and its the hidden charges I object to.

 

I'm sure Santandere for one would just introduce the european systems they run now and the rest of europe seems happy with that so it would be a good starting point.

Edited by Castlebest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a big flaw. I cannot beleive a top barrister is coming out with such an argument, or am I missing the point.

 

'We have stolen off everyone for 15 years , please dont make us give it back'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC NEWS | Business | Banks 'not Robin Hood in reverse'

 

 

So the charges exceeded the cost of dealing with an overdrawn customer because "the revenue stream is essential to the whole of the current account structure".

 

Don't we know it:mad::mad::mad::mad:


All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

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

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant believe he is using this as a serious argument to justify what the banks are doing, it seems mad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hf,

 

It does seem a very strange argument to use, but I suppose all the other arguments re charges have been found to be spurious, so it's a last resort.

 

I can't think of any other reason for them to be using this approach:confused:


All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

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

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I cant believe he is using this as a serious argument to justify what the banks are doing, it seems mad.

 

Let us hope the Law Lords agree. The banks have been crooks for the past 10 years, better to pay everyone back than have the Criminal Prosecution Service involved.It is cheaper for the Taxpayer, us, who in fact pay these peoples salarys now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact its just come to me that we are paying for their Barrister Vos to act against us! Isn't life ironic:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a big flaw. I cannot beleive a top barrister is coming out with such an argument, or am I missing the point.

 

'We have stolen off everyone for 15 years , please dont make us give it back'

bankrobbery.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bankrobbery.jpg[/center]

 

Hes not sorry though! Got a fat bonus at home! You can get money back now that has been criminally gained I think thats a road we can go down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
;) I wonder how long they will take to come to to a descision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
;) I wonder how long they will take to come to to a descision?

 

Law Lords are considering their verdict which could come before the end of July(recess for the court) or October in the new Supreme Court.
quoted from 'yourbank'

 

lets hope they can manage to come to a decision before they all go off on their summer hols:p

Edited by charleyfarley

All advice offered here is my opinion only based on what I would do in a given situation. If you wish to act on it you do so at your own discretion

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

I have no legal expertise or qualification, and give advice on the basis of my own experience and nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

;)lol, yes I agree. simples. banks wrong, cag right,

 

give us our money back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The banks have already shown how guilty they are coz paying out right now...a couple of times this year, ive received refunds off them already :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

;)wow thats good news, how come they have paid you and which Bank?

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...