Bank Charge issues Post Test case - Repayment: how will charges be repaid?

[BankFodder]

Assuming then that the OFT confirms its preliminary view that bank charges have been historically excessive and therefore unfair: --

 

Repayment: how will charges be repaid?

 

·Proactively or on demand?

 

·How much will be repaid under a FSA repayment scheme?

 

oThe entire charge or the difference between the actual charge and the OFT suggested fair rate?

 

UTCCR 1999 makes no provision for partial validity of unfair terms. It is all or nothing. A judge would be obliged to award the entire charge to the customer in the absence of some valid counterclaim from the bank.

If the FSA approved a differential charge then they or the Oft would have to come up with a formula which allowed a differential to be paid on historical charges which were lower than today. For instance, charges in 1995 might typically have been £10. Would they really be able to say that a figure of 25% of any charge was a fair charge. Or rather than a formula, would they have to examine the charges level for each year and come up with a specific fair figure for that year.

 

 

 

After the heat - post test case issues in full

 

 

 

 

[yourbank]

The OFT will not make a decision on refunds or on a fair charge. They will ask for voluntary compliance which will be rejected and then they should apply to the courts for an injunction against the charges. At this point they leave the case. Remember under UTCCR 1999 whilst the term is unenforceable, it will be up to the National court to decide how far back that the breach requires repayment. The OFT in fact does not decide but a court ultimately will in all likelihood make the decision.

I will explain it in terms of credit card claims, on part 1.14 the OFT clearly state that ONLY a court can decide a fair; to quote them: "Only a court can decide finally whether a term is unfair, or at what level default charges should be set to meet the requirements of the UTCCRs."

 

The bold is what I have done and not what is in the report.

Personally I think the thread is slightly early since the Supreme Court could refer it to the ECJ but I am sure most of us within the bank charges campaign have thought about the consequences of bank charges being asssessed for fairness.

[robertsathome]

Hi all,

 

so now the OFT has won the case - how do we get our money back?

 

My claim is frozen in the county court system - what do I do now to get my money back asap?

 

What do I do to claim back the further charges I have suffered since my claim was submitted?

 

I am just looking for simple direction - simple answers to simple questions.

 

the thread system on this website disperses useful information. Surely importnat advice on the key issues that affect the majority of users should be in one place.

 

Regards,

Chris Roberts

[Surfer01]

What will happen with those of us who made the application through the FOS? Obviously before raising it an application was made to the bank tor efund charges. Do you think we will be treated the same as those that wwent down the court route.

In addition since we raised it with the FOS more bank charges have accummalated although none for the past 18 months. What will happen with these?

We used the FOS as a number of people were having success on that route and we did not have the funds available to go down the court route. Even more so now as I am unemployed and on benefits although the missus is still working albeit not at a great rate.

[BankFodder]

What will happen with those of us who made the application through the FOS? Obviously before raising it an application was made to the bank tor efund charges. Do you think we will be treated the same as those that wwent down the court route.

In addition since we raised it with the FOS more bank charges have accummalated although none for the past 18 months. What will happen with these?

We used the FOS as a number of people were having success on that route and we did not have the funds available to go down the court route. Even more so now as I am unemployed and on benefits although the missus is still working albeit not at a great rate.

this is a very interesting question and of course we will only know in the next few weeks or so. It is entirely possible that the ombudsman may decide simply to implement an FSA repayment scheme.

 

Only the courts will be not obliged to implement such a scheme and in fact only the courts will be obliged to apply this strict meaning of the regulations and this means that the courts would be obliged to pay the entire charge.

 

If you have acquired more charges then I suggest that you start putting your claim in immediately. Let me also say that just because you have got claiming with the ombudsman at the moment does not stop you going to court. You will not be able to do both the court and the ombudsman that there is nothing to stop you simply giving up on the ombudsman process completely and issuing your court claim now for the whole lot. It may well be that since you have been on this forum and since you will have read up a great deal about what you are really entitled to claim, that a revised claim submitted to the courts may be far more valuable to you.

[BankFodder]

Hi all,

 

so now the OFT has won the case - how do we get our money back?

 

My claim is frozen in the county court system - what do I do now to get my money back asap?

 

What do I do to claim back the further charges I have suffered since my claim was submitted?

 

I am just looking for simple direction - simple answers to simple questions.

 

the thread system on this website disperses useful information. Surely importnat advice on the key issues that affect the majority of users should be in one place.

 

Regards,

Chris Roberts

as you should know, the OFT has not yet been declared the winner. That will be happening soon.

 

As soon as that happens, you should write to the court and aask themto lift the stay on your case.

[Surfer01]

Thanks Bankfodder a very helpful reply. I don't think another SAR will be necessary as I have all my statemenst since the last SAR. Pity that we cannot use MOL to claim.

We assume that we are not obliged to use the nearest court when submitting our claim as the nearest one has big parking problems. One a bit further away has plenty of parking and no queues as it is in a smaller town.

[robertsathome]

Hang on...how should I know? I use this website to find out and on the front page of this site it says, i quote....

 

"

After the heat. - What are the issues after the OFT victory on bank charges? So the campaign has finally succeeded. Almost four years of challenge and conflict with the banking industry and the main issue on bank charges has been won - but the fall-out is only just beginning

."

 

So has it won or not??!!

Trying to find definitive information on this site is virtually impossible unless you have little else to do all day.

 

[BankFodder]

Thanks Bankfodder a very helpful reply. I don't think another SAR will be necessary as I have all my statemenst since the last SAR. Pity that we cannot use MOL to claim.

We assume that we are not obliged to use the nearest court when submitting our claim as the nearest one has big parking problems. One a bit further away has plenty of parking and no queues as it is in a smaller town.

actually I'm not sure that Money Claim Online can't be used.

 

We rather stopped using it because the banks were causing too many problems about schedule charges not being sent. They were being extremely obstructive about everything.

 

I don't expect them to be obstructive anymore. I only expect them to start quibbling the amount of compensation being claimed.

 

I think that money claim can be used as long as people get a very basic minimum details in: --

 

Account number

date

number of charges

related interest taken

reference to it being unfair under UTCCR

total claimed

restitutionary damages

a percent interest in the alternative

 

I think that that we may try to put up a new template for this. Money claim was very useful and very helpful and a lot of people who might not otherwise have claimed benefited from it

[Surfer01]

looks like we are stuffed as far as MOL is concerned. If we were to pursue it through MOL it will cost us £70 but unfortunately as I am on ESA, we cannot afford to pay £70 unless one of our creditors is not paid. Catch 22!

[BankFodder]

On the basis that there is no general stay. There has been a recommendation that individual County Court judges stay bank charges claims - and in fact they have all done so. However, it is down to each judge to make his own decision.

 

Once the the judgment is handed down, then the basis for stays no longer exists because they are all predicated on an outstanding test case.

 

By writing to the judge, there is no costs element.

[angel_1]

hiya all

 

am subbing as to learn more thanks to all for their comments and posts

 

have a fun day laters angel x

[enoughisenough]

Hi all

 

I looked on the supreme court website and found....nothing?

 

When is this being handed down? Any clues? And the media, (oh yes the media) would have been like a rat the proverbial drainpipe if it had gone the other way.

 

I'll read more thoroughly soon. But can I take it absolutely written in stone that the law lords have swung behind the OFT?

[andrew1]

Personally I find it a disgrace that the banks are not made to automatically repay what has been taken from EVERY persons account, not just those on the forums or who have the wherewithall to go chasing things through the courts system.

 

There will be tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people who have had charges which would be due repayment, it should not be left to the consumer to have to ask, but the banks made to automatically pay. Those whose accounts have closed should be traced using the same tracing agents they use to find people when they abscond.

 

The OFT should make recommendations or the Judiciary should dictate exactly what period should be covered and the criteria used for the repayments whatever the cost. This is far too big an issue to be left to those able enough, well enough, or with the time on their hands to go chasing this. The banks c*cked - up - they should be put to task with a remedy.

 

just my 2p's worth.

 

A1

[yourbank]

On the basis that there is no general stay. There has been a recommendation that individual County Court judges stay bank charges claims - and in fact they have all done so. However, it is down to each judge to make his own decision.

 

Once the the judgment is handed down, then the basis for stays no longer exists because they are all predicated on an outstanding test case.

 

By writing to the judge, there is no costs element.

 

To quote the litigation agreement and on the basis of the judgement going against the banks on the issue of whether UTCCR 1999 applies to bank charges I would expect further advice being given to the county courts. After all, we have the substantive issues to resolve formerly.

The original litigation agreement stated:

 

"G. The Parties intend that, depending on the outcome of the Investigation and the Court’s determination of the Preliminary Issues, the substantive issues of fairness and penalty will be determined subsequently in these proceedings. The Parties also envisage that other issues flowing from those issues (such as customer restitution and limitation) would come to be determined concurrently with the said substantive issues."

 

My opinion is that it is dangerous to talk about lifting stays prior to the Supreme Court giving their judgement since it would be reasonable for them to have a certain amount of dialogue with the Head of the County Courts with regards to claims already in the courts. Whether a county court can decide those substantive issues is questionable since the banks could appeal every single case without formal legal certainty on the substantive issues.

[phoenix11]

Can anyone explain in very easy steps if it is still possible to help my son reclaim his bank charges?

 

I've not been able to take this on before now due to his health problems, but certainly in the forseeable future, he's simply never going to be in a position to pay off his debts other than with the £1 per month or so.

 

One bank for example have levied charges over the years which account for over half his debt.

 

Should we still do something or are we too late?

[foolishgirl]

Can anyone explain in very easy steps if it is still possible to help my son reclaim his bank charges?

 

 

Start here phoenix:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/faqs-please-read-these/25457-guide-reclaiming-bank-charges.html

 

If you need help with a specific bank, post a new thread in the appropiate forum eg. Abbey for Abbey bank etc. then you will get more individual help.

[enoughisenough]

What's the betting this thread is buzzing soon?

[90DC]

So i have already disputed my claim with Natwest (And my partner's claim for Natwest and Lloyd's). These are on hold till a decision is made, as my cases are already pending, how do i go about reclaiming my £2872.00? Oh that would be nice before Christmas.

[Michael Browne]

So i have already disputed my claim with Natwest (And my partner's claim for Natwest and Lloyd's). These are on hold till a decision is made, as my cases are already pending, how do i go about reclaiming my £2872.00?

 

The pending Supreme Court decision is to decide whether the terms that allows the banks to charge can be assessed for fairness. They are not deciding on the fairness of the charges. That is for the OFT to decide

This is the half way mark in the OFT test case issues.

Oh that would be nice before Christmas.

 

Yes, just not this Christmas

[landy_alert]

So i have already disputed my claim with Natwest (And my partner's claim for Natwest and Lloyd's). These are on hold till a decision is made, as my cases are already pending, how do i go about reclaiming my £2872.00? Oh that would be nice before Christmas.

 

Hi 90DC:)

 

You say your claims are on hold - have you filed at court or are they just lodged with the bank?

 

If you post a link to your thread(s) for these claims, we will be able to assist you further.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[90DC]

Good job i wasn't relying on that money. So will they have lost the case next Wednesday then? (If they do lose). I know you said it was the half-way point.

 

Supreme court cases are so confusing.

[90DC]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/183247-re-charges-customer-response.html

 

There is a link for my thread, it was created ages ago. Lodged with the bank, shall i start a claim in court after Wednesday?

[yourbank]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/183247-re-charges-customer-response.html

 

There is a link for my thread, it was created ages ago. Lodged with the bank, shall i start a claim in court after Wednesday?

CAG, this site, recommends going to the court route regardless of anything else even if the case is going to be stayed anyway.

[phoenix11]

OK - so we're not out of time to start the claim for him then?

 

So if I start the ball rolling for him with and do an SAR on the one account we don't have any statements for, and then write to the other two banks to request the return of the old charges under the Unfair Contract Terms Act, plus we could throw in a hardship claim too, and then if they don't play ball, we can still take them to court later, or go through the Ombudsman???

 

Have I got this right?

 

What if we don't get the SAR info back before next Wednesday - should we advise them with the SAR that he will be contesting the specific debt and require any unfair penalty charges applied over the past 6 years to be returned?

 

He will still owe money, but nothing like as much as they say he does now. It will still mean paying £1 per month for the next 100 years or so!