Supreme court rules

[baconbuttyman]

It's pretty simple really, don't break the rules and there aren't any penalty charges.

 

What is it with you people ?

 

lol i saw that interview also, did you see how much botox the bank spokeswoman had, i suppose that was to stop her laughing all the way to the bank

[bazaar]

It's pretty simple really, don't break the rules and there aren't any penalty charges.

 

What is it with you people ?

 

Oh we have a little D*** bank lackey here, hello

[TenaciousC]

It's pretty simple really, don't break the rules and there aren't any penalty charges.

 

What is it with you people ?

 

I don't have any charges to claim back at the moment anyway, as it happens, but for some it isn't just about that, it's about holding the banks to account for their OWN RULE BREAKING.

 

Vegnomeat is a troll, anyone know of a large billy goat who needs a troll kicking contract?

[baconbuttyman]

so,, will the waiver be lifted

[vegnomeat]

Financial institutions never face any penalties and Never break the rules? That's why the FSA has issued a record £28 million in fines to financial firms. Get it into your head that without this revenue stream the banks will be determined to grab their billions from the taxpayer and every current holder in the land.

 

Anyone with a current account. Move it if you can to the Nationwide or the Co-op. Where the customers are the shareholders. Let the High Street Robbers go back to their profitable investment banking that caused the economic meltdown.

 

Well said, they were fined 28 million pounds, if you take advantage of an unauthorised overdraft you too will pay a penalty, if they write to you telling you so you will pay for their letter. However, if you stuck to the terms and conditions of the Bank you won't pay any penalties, simple really.

[enoughisenough]

Finally, after posting the wrong case up, the Judgment is available on the SC Website.

 

Here's the judgment.

 

http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/docs/uksc_2009_0070_judgmentV2.pdf

 

I suggest reading it. It really is not the doomsday decision that everyone thinks it is. The OFT lost the right to assess the charges for fairness. That is all. We have not lost any rights in respect of challenging the fairness of the terms, although the banks have admittedly gained a lot of ground with this ruling remember that was from a position of caving in to just about every claim without contesting it in court.

[Crapstone]

I think Peter could be right about lifting the stay.

 

However, I think this also needs a co-ordinated campaign to clearly state how unhappy with the decision we consumers are:

 

Options:

 

1) A petition on the No 10 webisite express our disgust and outrage urging the goverment to overturn this decision.

 

2) A Rally in Central London to follow up the above.

 

Whatever we do we shouldnt just roll over and die.

 

ST

 

Totally agree..if this was France or some minority hard-done by group the streets would be awash with angry people.

[Ruprecht]

This is going to be where the action is I think:-

 

UK and EC competition law prohibit two main types of anti-competitive activity:

 

• anti-competitive agreements (under the Chapter I and Article 81 prohibitions); and
  
• abuse of dominant market position (under the Chapter II / Article 82 prohibitions).
  

[onestressedwoman]

If you took a little off each exorberant (spelt wrong sorry) bonuses then surely 2 odd billion would be made up easily to make us the ordinary person not struggle as much

 

I hope Crapstone gets total support we should all move our money to under the matress -

 

Veg not meat Your are more a veg than the meat

[wesleyt43]

So angry, but what did we really expect, I have now been left in a situation where an unauthorised payment took from my account a matter that I have disputed but was told it can take 120 days to sort out, and since september alone due to this the bank have took almost £600 in overdraft charges all of which have left me over my overdraft limit (so who knows how much in the past 6 years) and as now I am stupid enough to bank with halifax with their new charges which begin early dec I am now looking forward to getting a £5 charge aday added to my account, I cant afford to pay what I owe and if todays decision had of been different I would have had no problems at all, yet know what to do next I have no idea, but I cant pay so????????? we are all being robbed by the banks, the government and too many other organisations and companies to mention, like sheep bing led to slaughter comes to mind.

[baconbuttyman]

Well said, they were fined 28 million pounds, if you take advantage of an unauthorised overdraft you too will pay a penalty, if they write to you telling you so you will pay for their letter. However, if you stuck to the terms and conditions of the Bank you won't pay any penalties, simple really.

i am already on with moving out of the rbs, does anyone know if skipton is indipendant.

[slackda]

what a Farce.....Like everyone has said i have to agree the ruling was for one reason...."restoring Big players confidence in the banking system" can;t have the system fail again....tosh why not just keep stalling unitl encomny was in a better posistion??

[Crapstone]

However, if you stuck to the terms and conditions of the Bank you won't pay any penalties, simple really.

 

I'll stick something alright...and I know just the place if you continue to troll.

[enoughisenough]

If it were so simple why has it taken two years of top legal brains and courts toing and froing in their decisions to come to this rather narrow and artificial construction between core and ancillary terms. The transposal of the directive means that unfair terms shall not be binding on the consumer.

 

Perhaps you would like to provide us with a SIMPLE yes or no as to whether all laws should be observed by all, or only observed when they suit us? SIMPLE? I don't think so.

[vegnomeat]

Crapstone this isn't a troll at all. Using unauthorised overdraft charges as an example please explain to me why I am wrong ?

 

Regards

[rippedoff15]

Just see the news regardng the test case, what will happen now ???????? have a claim which went to court and the court uled that the defendant the Halifax must file their defence by 16 Nov 4pm which they did not and the court stated that their defence after this dtae will be stuck out so on the 18th Nov 09 we filed for the judgment, which the judgement papers are with the judge. Can the judge now stop our claim due the the test case or confirm the judgement as the defendant dd not file defence by the date set by the court. we are hopng that the court will issue the judgement as the claim was filed before the test case hearing and the defendant did not replied to the court papers

 

here hoping

 

UPDATE i have called the ourt today and the judge has issued the judgement in relation to our claim, now hoping the bank will refund

Edited November 25, 2009 by rippedoff15

[bazaar]

On reflection, Its only the OFT that cannot have a say in the charges. That doesnt mean, that someone can't take their bank to court and demand a refund based on what the charges are actually made up of. They would have to show that it costs them the amount they charge, making profits from charges may be illegal.

As for the Troll Vegnobrains, a quick trace route and block should put paid their Network for a while:p

[kurvaface]

Time to vote with your feet and invest in a fireproof mattress instead of bankers bonuses

 

Quite seriously......would my money be better off in a fireproof matress?

[poisoned_monkey]

On reflection, Its only the OFT that cannot have a say in the charges. That doesnt mean, that someone can take their bank to court and demand a refund based on what the charges are actually made up of. They would have to show that it costs them the amount they charge, making profits from charges may be illegal.

As for the Troll Vegnobrains, a quick trace route and block should put paid their Network for a while:p

 

 

I totally agree.

I dont see this as the end.merely the beginning of the 2nd phase.

[enoughisenough]

Maybe it's just me and I'm SIMPLE, really SIMPLE.

 

Perhaps those who argue that it is SIMPLE could have a quick read through the SIMPLE UTCCR's and enlighten as as to the SIMPLICITY of the following regulations. In fact if you break the law you deserve to be punished/penalised right? SIMPLE eh?

 

In SIMPLE terms please show us in the following regulations, which carry the full force of law, in the UK, where the banks charges are fair. It's SIMPLE really so shouldn't take you long.

 

Statutory Instrument 1999 No. 2083

[slackda]

Crapstone this isn't a troll at all. Using unauthorised overdraft charges as an example please explain to me why I am wrong ?

 

Regards

 

 

ok example for u , i go to a high street foood retailer to by my dinner a day before payday, i haven't had time to check my balance but im pretty sure i have £10 in my account, now i spend £9.80 in said store, in fact i had £8.30 avail, now the transaction gets authorised for that and i get charged £38 for unathorised overdraft request, ok the T&C's of my account probably say that that will happen, but i don't have a choice i can't bank else where, where this doens't happen?? how can that be fair.

[Crapstone]

Crapstone this isn't a troll at all. Using unauthorised overdraft charges as an example please explain to me why I am wrong ?

 

Regards

 

If only it were that B&W.....I suggest you read the threads on this site. This is CAG ..Consumer Action Group and meant for people that are concerned consumers, not people that wan't to argue against them. I'm sure you'll be more at home on a bank support website.

[bobsp]

It was hardly going to be any other way, the government has spent billions on these banks, they were not going to let the banks loose this and pay out billions were they. We have lost. There are glimmers of hope, but very very slim ones IMHO.

 

The only was forward is to make sure you dont go OD, atall. Since I got my charges back, well most of them, 2 years ago, I have gone over once, and been charged £8 by Barclays. I can live with that...

[speedtrip]

 

Anyone with a current account. Move it if you can to the Nationwide or the Co-op. Where the customers are the shareholders. Let the High Street Robbers go back to their profitable investment banking that caused the economic meltdown.

 

I might just well do this and if a sizeable number of us did the same that would make a dent in their deposits

 

On another note I believe that banks have to retain a certain % of assets in the form of cash deposits, which has been reviewed since the financial crisis. If we were to withdraw our deposits or transfer to building societies not affialiated with the major high street banks what kind of impact would thsi have on their cash deposits.

 

We all know that there is a move from investment to more traditional high st banks using customer deposits as leverage for loans etc so i wonder if there was a move by a good % of retail cutomers to "other accounts" whether this would make them think.

 

Regards

 

ST

[Sunshine54]

hi Bobsp

 

isn't that the point though? you are now paying £8 where it would have previously been much higher. That's because the inflated charges were unfair