Jump to content


Supreme court rules


Consumer dude
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4493 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

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.

 

If I put in my T&C's that I will hit you over the head with a hammer if you fail to do X or Y it doesn't mean that I can get away with it, hitting you over the head with a hammer is still wrong.

All we are saying is the banks are wrong and so far have failed to prove otherwise.

I will continue to screw these immoral, greedy bankers any way I can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 360
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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.

 

I have serious reservations about your thought processes.
I think maybe spend a bit of time reassessing your own thoughts.

 

The decision was bent.
That was my first thoughts, but I thought about it for a while, maybe it was maybe it wasn't, but I wasn't there so can't reliably comment on that.

 

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'.
If you look at it in anyway other than doom and gloom, you can see some possibility that this might be a blessing in disguise. After all, all is not lost now.

 

Absolute tosh.
Well you're entitled to your opinion.

 

In all honestly, I would love, absolutely love to see the banks pay. It would be no less than they deserve. they made my life a misery only 6 years ago, treat others as you would have others treat you.. go stomp all over them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite all that has been said here today, there seems to me to be a lot of positives in this - see Bankfodder's Global Announcement for example, and the un-freezing of claims.

 

In my view, the dust needs to settle, and the legal experts, both here and elsewhere, need time to fully assess the judgement, turn it into English that we can all understand, and then advise us on the best course of action to take from here.

 

It seems to me that there is VERY likely to be a positive way forward, and we just need to wait for that expert advice - after all, a few days or weeks on top of the large ammount of time that has passed already is hardly significant! As someone else has already said, where else can you get 8% these days!

I do my best to be helpful, but at the end of the day I'm not a professional - please seek further advice if you're not sure. On the other hand, if I have helped, please click my scales - thanks ;)

 

Current Claims (all for friends!) -

 

Abbey - over £4k - Court claim issued & AQ filed ('Tish vs Abbey'). Alloc'n Hearing 21 Sept - Claim stayed 29/8/07.

Cap One - just under £2k - WON (just over 2k!)('Tish vs Cap One')

Cap One - just under £1000 - WON (just over £1k) Nov 07 (JimmyBoy vs Cap One)

Lloyds TSB - £3.5k - Court claim issued, defence rec'd and AQ filed; Alloc'n hearing 7th Sept Claim stayed 29/8/07! (JimmyBoy vs Lloyds')

MBNA - over £1k for mis-sold PPI - WON - approx £1500(IpswichWitch vs MBNA . . .)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think maybe spend a bit of time reassessing your own thoughts.

 

That was my first thoughts, but I thought about it for a while, maybe it was maybe it wasn't, but I wasn't there so can't reliably comment on that.

 

If you look at it in anyway other than doom and gloom, you can see some possibility that this might be a blessing in disguise. After all, all is not lost now.

 

Well you're entitled to your opinion.

 

In all honestly, I would love, absolutely love to see the banks pay. It would be no less than they deserve. they made my life a misery only 6 years ago, treat others as you would have others treat you.. go stomp all over them!

 

Look, I am angry and maybe was a little biting in my comments. However, it is so obvious the ruling was bent. You must know that deep down I think. You are quite right about uniting and fighting, but do so in the knowledge of how bent our whole system of government is. Don't make any excuses for those tossers! ;)

 

Breaking news - banks say all claims are terminated!

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I am angry and maybe was a little biting in my comments. However, it is so obvious the ruling was bent. You must know that deep down I think. You are quite right about uniting and fighting, but do so in the knowledge of how bent our whole system of government is. Don't make any excuses for those tossers! ;)

 

If you read my earlier posts from this morning you'll notice I already said about the corruption part....

 

I'm not defending the ruling, lords or the banks, I am merely saying, deep in there somewhere is some hint at our next move.. and it was given to us (perhaps unwittingly) by the Lords themselves.

They gave away that we and the OFT should perhaps try a different route.

 

And I'm sure that's what the OFT et al will be doing too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

 

The Court of Appeal denied the banks leave to appeal the case to the House of Lords, but they did so anyway.

 

In any case, the judgment does not mean what you seem to think it means. Read these first.

  • Haha 1

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

[breaking news - banks say all claims are terminated![/

 

Where?

 

BBC NEWS 24. That was read out verbatim et literatim by a reporter who seemed to be reading from a statement issued by the banks. Maybe Angela Knight didn't have the balls to read it herself. :D

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC NEWS 24. That was read out verbatim et literatim by a reporter who seemed to be reading from a statement issued by the banks. Maybe Angela Knight didn't have the balls to read it herself. :D

 

Courtesy of the unique way the BBC is funded!

 

Does the government have any bearing on how the BBC operates I wonder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the possibility is that all these new terms will mean...if we get any charges back under clauses mentioned previously, then any assesment of repayment of historical charges will mean significant reduction, so £800 under the new "correct" and "fair charging" regime will probably mean you get back a lot less than £800, say £400.

 

......"financial engineering"....as somone quoted...

 

maybe....

Veester

 

"Challenges are what make life interesting; overcoming them is what makes life meaningful." -- Joshua J. Marine‏ ;)

 

Better than the truth itself is truthful living.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read my earlier posts from this morning you'll notice I already said about the corruption part....

 

I'm not defending the ruling, lords or the banks, I am merely saying, deep in there somewhere is some hint at our next move.. and it was given to us (perhaps unwittingly) by the Lords themselves.

They gave away that we and the OFT should perhaps try a different route.

 

And I'm sure that's what the OFT et al will be doing too.

 

This is my take on it. The Supreme Court was trying to save some face and the OFT won't take on another case. The British Bull**** Corporation is already sending out subtle messages that the 'OFT might not have the heart for another case'. Maybe they have been brought into line? We'll see won't we...

 

 

Courtesy of the unique way the BBC is funded!

 

Does the government have any bearing on how the BBC operates I wonder?

 

Our corrupt system does.

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey this is a very emotive sujbect and when I first heard the decision I was shocked.

 

I might be wrong but maybe the judge is being a bit clever as the banks have got away on a technicality but there seems to be other options. Maybe the OFT missed a trick here ... i dont know.

 

Think about this for a moment the Govt have piled a lot of money into the banks (our money) and approx 1/3 of the banking industry revenue comes from bank charges. If they lose that it will take longer for them to pay the Govt Loans back ... see where i am coming from.

 

Maybe there was pressure brought upon the SC to use this technicality but maybe the judge has pointed the way forward.

 

In real terms I suspect a million disgruntled customers is a small % of the total banking population and we could be in the minority because most people do not like complaining and lets faces it hardly easy to make a claim is it.

 

If this is successful the model we will end up with will be accounts that have annual charges attached to them and the FSA/Govt/Consumer Groups will agree a fair price guideline for the services.

 

ST

RBS/Triton - Gone Away No CCA

RBS/Moorcroft - Gone way No CCA

RBS/AIC - Gone Away No CCA

RBS/Intrum - Gone Away No CCA

RBS/Regal - Gone Away

 

Cahoot/Link - CCA in Dispute

 

Capital One - Settled

 

Lloyds Bank - Awaiting Outcome from Supreme Court Hearing.

 

Lloyds Credit Credit - Repayment Plan

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my take on it. The Supreme Court was trying to save some face and the OFT won't take on another case. The British Bull**** Corporation is already sending out subtle messages that the 'OFT might not have the heart for another case'. Maybe they have been brought into line? We'll see won't we...

 

Pitchforks, torches and Pikes it is then!

Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC NEWS 24. That was read out verbatim et literatim by a reporter who seemed to be reading from a statement issued by the banks.

 

If the BBC haven't simply read it out and attributed it to an appropriate source, or if they expand or editorialize on this without correcting it, phone the BBC Duty Office immediately to complain.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pitchforks, torches and Pikes it is then!

 

Hmm, metaphorically. We need a well organised huge march. :) The powers that be would love a riot and use it to their own advantage. They even use agent provocateurs when it suits them. We'll have to see what Bankfodder, Dave and the site team think. We'd need inter site cooperation and a massive media campaign.

 

 

If the BBC haven't simply read it out and attributed it to an appropriate source, or if they expand or editorialize on this without correcting it, phone the BBC Duty Office immediately to complain.

 

She said 'the banks said'...

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, metaphorically. We need a well organised huge march. :) The powers that be would love a riot and use it to their own advantage. They even use agent provocateurs when it suits them. We'll have to see what Bankfodder, Dave and the site team think. We'd need inter site cooperation and a massive media campaign.

 

 

Media help in our favour would help that tremendously.

 

Where does one find that sort of cooperation? The Sun, Daily Mail?

Link to post
Share on other sites

" The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water. "

 

The exact words of the BBC website.

 

I don't care what is said, there is no chance in hell they are going to get me to pay back £1,500 worth of interest, baring in mind they failed to pay back the full amount I requested 3 years ago! they paid me £100 less and now my charges have built up again due to their failure.

 

I'm taking this stance- they can drag me to the court room and they can threaten me with a jail sentence, but they will not be getting a penny out of me. Who's with me?! :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

" The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water. "

 

The exact words of the BBC website.

 

I don't care what is said, there is no chance in hell they are going to get me to pay back £1,500 worth of interest, baring in mind they failed to pay back the full amount I requested 3 years ago! they paid me £100 less and now my charges have built up again due to their failure.

 

I'm taking this stance- they can drag me to the court room and they can threaten me with a jail sentence, but they will not be getting a penny out of me. Who's with me?! :mad:

 

But surely if they already paid you back some money they have admitted something was amiss in a roundabout way.. it's all twisted isn't it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Media help in our favour would help that tremendously.

 

Where does one find that sort of cooperation? The Sun, Daily Mail?

 

The site already has plenty of media experience. We'll have to wait and see what the site team think about a march. I'll start a thread and see what the interest is.

 

Even Martin Lewis sounded angry. I didn't know he was capable. :lol::lol::lol:

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Media help in our favour would help that tremendously.

 

Where does one find that sort of cooperation? The Sun, Daily Mail?

 

Worth a try. One thing we don't have is the BBC. I'm told that the radio bulletins on 1 and 2 have repeatedly stated, without qualification, that the banks won't have to pay up. Not heard them myself, so can't really take it on.

HSBCLloyds TSBcontractual interestNew Tax Creditscoming for you?NTL/Virgin Media

 

Never give in ... Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. Churchill, 1941

Link to post
Share on other sites

" The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water. "

 

The exact words of the BBC website.

 

I don't care what is said, there is no chance in hell they are going to get me to pay back £1,500 worth of interest, baring in mind they failed to pay back the full amount I requested 3 years ago! they paid me £100 less and now my charges have built up again due to their failure.

 

I'm taking this stance- they can drag me to the court room and they can threaten me with a jail sentence, but they will not be getting a penny out of me. Who's with me?! :mad:

 

 

 

 

Your quite right, people will just say get stuffed or words to that effect..

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...