Supreme court rules

[vegnomeat]

Dont forget to ask if they want fries.

 

With your history I would keep quiet if I were you, stones and glasshouses etc

 

Regards

[Wethers82]

Tenacious C, Peter Lucas, DaveFirewalker, Speedtrip and Fernack (etc); Thanks for clarifying things. Definetly puts some ease on this situation.

 

Thanks again for your positivity and keeping everybody sane (almost).

[jodenice]

With your history I would keep quiet if I were you, stones and glasshouses etc

 

Regards

 

we do aim to please. And if I'm right, this is a public forum. Keeping quiets not really the aim of the game is it. Doh.

[amber]

"The Court said it would not allow an appeal by the OFT to the European Court of Justice. "

 

But if the banks had lost the case.......

[EricTheRed]

It’s half time and we are losing 1-0. The ref has just given a goal that was blatantly offside.

 

The masses are making two substitutions bringing on number 5 and number 8. Looks like an interesting centre half.

[Keasby]

Presumably if we do get these cases to court the banks will have to reveal true costs etc and prove the charges are fair/transparent/not an abuse of an unbalanced contract. Isn't this part of the reason that they settled so much before the test case and the stay?

 

As this part hasn't changed does anyone agree that it is a huge risk for banks to let these go to court as, if just one of us wins outright then the floodgates will be well and truly open.

 

I'm sure some banks will have their confidence boosted by this and may risk going to court but I fell many will still see it as too big a risk and settle out of good will or whatever.

[mcb1975]

 

If I worked for an agency and I wasn't paid on time, and I was then charged by my bank for not having enough money to cover DD's then I'd expect that agency to foot the bill.

 

If they didn't I'd sue them and I'd win. There are many cases that this has happened.

 

You could see an 18 year old on minimum wage and with limited intellectual and financial resources taking their temporary employer to court over £35?

 

I fear this is a waste of both of our times, and is diverting away from the more salient issues of moral decency, social responsibility and totalitarian fiscal policy. We will simply have to agree to disagree on this one.

[sequenci]

HI guys, try and keep the discussion on topic otherwise Mrs Cagbot might come avisiting.

[einyuk]

in my opinion is the banks don't want a mass public payout, they want to deal with this on a case by case basis like before. I will be going for my stay to be lifted and base my fight on the amount charged and prove it senario. Still think it's buisness as usual in my eyes.

[paulson1985]

Definatly buisness as usual.

 

Chin up breath deeply fight back

[sequest]

If you want some great insight into what is really happening in the banking world and the attempt by the bankers to bring about their New World Order through the global warming [problem] (which has just been debunked as a massive fraud) in order to introduce their carbon taxes on everything that breathes, I suggest looking at the reports by Christopher Story - his reports are sent to banks internationally. You will be shocked to find out how your world is nothing like you might think it is. BTW - only parties with hope of getting us out of the corrupt EU is UKIP and BNP.

Not sure if I am allowed to post Christopher Story's site, so apologies if not, but here goes:

Announcements Archive

[Baggio]

in my opinion is the banks don't want a mass public payout, they want to deal with this on a case by case basis like before. I will be going for my stay to be lifted and base my fight on the amount charged and prove it senario. Still think it's buisness as usual in my eyes.

 

 

correct.

 

carry on reclaiming, the supreme court have given us the argument to contest and reclaim charges against.

 

NEW ROUTE FOR CHARGES CLAIMS

 

 

 

After further consideration of today's judgement, we consider that the door is now open for claims to be made under sections 5 and 8 of the UTCCR 1999.

 

We believe that the Charges term within your bank contract will not be binding under Regulation 8 as Regulation 5 points to terms being unfair if they are not individually negotiated if the cause a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties to the detriment of the consumer. Once it is established that the term violates Regulation 5, then Regulation 8 negates that term and so the banks will be liable to return all charges.

 

Over the next couple of days new templates will be drawn up, but the most important thing is that claims are not allowed to be closed. If your bank notifies you that your claim has been closed please let us know.

[MikeBigg]

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.

 

And this is where the big issue is - how the hell do you get out of a spiral like this.

 

Why the hell do banks have the right to my money before I pay for food, water, gas, electric, rent, etc. No one else has that right, not even HMRC.

 

If the penalties are just the cost of banking, then they can send me a bill like everyone else. I can then chose when and how and if I want to pay it.

 

Regards,

 

Mike

[TenaciousC]

Tenacious C, Peter Lucas, DaveFirewalker, Speedtrip and Fernack (etc); Thanks for clarifying things. Definetly puts some ease on this situation.

 

Thanks again for your positivity and keeping everybody sane (almost).

 

Well I changed my tune from this morning, I was of the angry opinion this morning afer listening to the news on TV, but then of course they would be sensationialising it for TV. Once I'd read a little further into it I saw that this might be a blessing in a not so big disguise.

 

The important thing is to not let the Banks make you think they won anything, they did not not a thing, the Lords basically sent us the message "Stop! you're wandering down the wrong path, the path you want is over there..."

 

Soo, make sure that you let the banks know you're still on top, and that now they're really in trouble.. if they laugh at you, you know they giving one of those nervous defeated laughs and you can smile broadly.

They will be tremendously nervous now they know the stays are lifted... they know the really hard bit is about to come, and it is imperitive that it is made to be as uncomfortable for them as possible, for they deserve no dignity.

Edited November 25, 2009 by TenaciousC

[renegotiation]

the Lords basically sent us the message "Stop! you're wandering down the wrong path, the path you want is over there..."

 

LOL. I'm not saying you are a shill or that this is the be all and end all, but do you know how daft that comment sounds? How about we were on the right path and they should have verified that? Please!

[ADIE1965]

Unsurprisingly yesterday a received a email from RBoS regards changes to there T&C's. Just one example of these changes referred to Unpaid Item Fee's:-

The Unpaid Item Fee has been reduced from £38 to £5.

The maximum amount of this fee we will charge has been reduced from £114 per day to £50 in any charging period.

 

Some of my claim against RBoS is made up of Unpaid Item Fee's some being as much as £228 per charge.

Now if I where to make a claim against a credit card company I can recover the difference between the original charge and the charge they make now.

So could we find a loophole here against the bank's and therefor my charge of £228 minus new charge of £5 would make a legitimate claim for £223?

 

What do you think???

[baconbuttyman]

just contacted blackpool county court and they have advised me that if i try and get the stay lifted not only would it be a waste of money but the claim would not proceed as the oft lost...........yeah right, i believe the door is open again, time will tell

[TenaciousC]

LOL. I'm not saying you are a shill or that this is the be all and end all, but do you know how daft that comment sounds? How about we were on the right path and they should have verified that? Please!

 

I am definately not a shill, I have no relation to either party in this mornings doings.

 

Well whatever path you were on, it turns out was the wrong path.

You might like to think you were on the right path, but the OFT made a mistake, and they were told this.

The Lords have clarified this, and no matter how bitter you might feel about it you do now know this and can start to find the alternate paths.

 

You can be bitter if you like, but you'll be getting nowhere.

 

As for being daft, I don't think it is. It's merely a look at the deeper outcome of what has happened today.

 

Some people will only ever look for the dark side..

 

Another user in the iggy bin..

[Viano]

Unless I misheard all cases will now have to be heard within 8 weeks according to Paul Lewis on Money Box Live

[Wethers82]

just contacted blackpool county court and they have advised me that if i try and get the stay lifted not only would it be a waste of money but the claim would not proceed as the oft lost...........yeah right, i believe the door is open again, time will tell

 

I think that is common process for the courts to say something like that.

 

When I attended the small claims court first time around (in which Lloyds didn't even turn-up) I was told that there was chance of losing and for it all to be a waste of money. He also made reference to someone who lost a case in blackpool (coincidence only).

 

I think its like warning about getting an immunisation - it could work but there's always a chance the nurse could trip up with the needle and stab you in the head. (Yes - I know that sounded ridiculous but there is a point in there somewhere)

[rebel11]

These are all strong words, most of you state you cannot accept what has just happened today, the verdict is a joke, so why not stand united and organize a picket in front of the Supreme Court building?

We cannot expect anything to change unless we start doing something!

Why not stand up together and do what people in my native country do when they are not happy?

Posting comments is fair enough as I am also upset if not disgusted about the decision made by the Supreme Court but media is a strong tool in this country so why not organize a picket??????

The power is in number, the decision affected us, normal people who as a result of deceptive bank politics are drowning in debts!

I am telling you all, let's get united and organize a picket.

All people (many still unaware they have been charged thousands in unfair charges) need to join us and all them bank bosses and court judges have to see us furious!

They are here for us not the other way round!!!!!

I am free for picketing at any time and have 4 free places in my car if anyone is up for it. (South Yorkshire area)

 

 

What this really needs is a march, a bit like the Poll Tax. It's numbers that will make the Government wake up.

[renegotiation]

I am definately not a shill, I have no relation to either party in this mornings doings.

 

Well whatever path you were on, it turns out was the wrong path.

You might like to think you were on the right path, but the OFT made a mistake, and they were told this.

The Lords have clarified this, and no matter how bitter you might feel about it you do now know this and can start to find the alternate paths.

 

You can be bitter if you like, but you'll be getting nowhere.

 

As for being daft, I don't think it is. It's merely a look at the deeper outcome of what has happened today.

 

Some people will only ever look for the dark side..

 

Another user in the iggy bin..

 

Being positive and keeping up the fight is obligatory. However, if you can hold the **** in the Supreme Court in anything other than a negative light over this decision, then I have serious reservations about your thought processes. The decision was bent. Your comments seemed to hint at something like 'oh, the Supreme Court weren't so mean after all. They are 'guiding' us down another path'. Absolute tosh.

[Consumer dude]

What this really needs is a march, a bit like the Poll Tax. It's numbers that will make the Government wake up.

 

 

 

 

 

I would go for a march..

[itstheone]

I'm shocked at this ruling.

 

What horse trading shenanigans went on behind the scenes???

 

Refusing them leave to appeal as well, this well and truly stinks of something:mad:

[renegotiation]

The solution to all this simple. Getting the solution is the problem! Unauthorised overdrafts need to be outlawed completely. No bank should allow any customer to go into an unauthorised overdraft! If a customer goes into an overdraft through a guaranteed cheque or Switch card payment etc., then the overdrawn amount should ONLY be treated as an authorised overdraft! If a bank wants to deny authorised overdrafts to certain customers they need to simply deny the customer the ability to do this by terminating their Switch card and not issuing new cheque books that are associated with such cards or not issuing them in the first place! All authorised overdrafts should only be subject to a rate of interest and no charges! There needs to be regulation on the cap of such an interest rate. THAT'S ALL FAIR. IT ISN'T HARD. HOWEVER, WE ARE BEING RULED BY BENT CROOKS!

 

That's what we need to march for in my view. Does anyone else support this? It has to be a well organised huge march.

Edited November 25, 2009 by renegotiation