Sheriff puts Bank of Scotland to proof on bank charges

[caro]

I was not at the evidence sessions although you will find film of the sessions on the Which? website, but I can assure you that VC was at the pubic debate at the RHS in February. Roger McFall was not able to attend if I recall correctly, but David Davis and Vince Cable were the 2 very familiar faces who were not only on the platform, but came and listened to people talking in their groups. The clip on the Which website was just a tiny bit of what went on, and the focus was on bank customers. Notes taken and comments made by the groups were collated by facilitators for review and analysis by the committee, and I'm sure there was much more went on behind the scenes.

 

Time will tell how effective the commission will be in addressing the issues, and I don't know if any changes will be in time to have an impact on this case. It's up to us, the consumer, to make sure that we take every opportunity to make our voices heard, and the link that you have posted is an opportunity not to be missed.

 

We know from bitter experience that theses things are not quickly resolved, especially if the banks can put a spanner in the works as they have in this HBOS case.

[manchesteruni]

Maybe, as site team, you could get an announcement put up then to encourage response from your members. The consultation has already been out for a month and time is getting short to respond.

[caro]

I'll bring it to the attention of admin and suggest they highlight it to maximise exposure on the site. Not sure when the next newsletter is but if it's in time I'll see if it can go in there.

[bustthematrix]

But we all know that TALK is cheap!

Too right. As always, with all these matters that prove very popular with the masses but potentially painful and embarrassing for the elite, it's never the rhetoric but the actions that matter.

 

There is a desperate need for the masses to learn to focus on what these bodies actually DO vs what they say they will do.

[caro]

The only way to find out if people will do what they say is to give them a try. If experience shows us they do nothing then try something else, but we have to keep trying. IMO anything is worth trying, but I agree it's best to concentrate effort where it's likely to have most effect. The usual channels have not been that effective in sorting out the bank charges issue so far, so we have to try other things, and if someone appears willing to listen, and (you never know) may just act on what they say, it does no harm to inform and educate.

[bustthematrix]

A somewhat wise fellow I used to work with liked to say "people never seem to do what you expect them to do, but they almost always do what they know you will inspect them on." I have found this to be often true in many applications.

 

Caro, wasn't being cynical in my earlier comment, am always willing to give folk a try (at least I like to think so). I just wanted to caution folk into getting too excited about the many empty but moving promises doled out by many in positions of influence. If we hold ourselves and our leaders to account, and actually inspect and appraise their performances from time to time, we're more likely to get better 'service'.

[caro]

No worries BTM. I have more than my share of cynical moments.

[kennyh]

Some of the foregoing is encouraging but where, exactly, are we on the ECJ cases and those in UK courts being fought by GLC et al; the legal 'debates' etc.

I ask this in light of Ken Clarke's utterances in the House yesterday vis-a-vis legal aid's future or lack of.

[caro]

Sorry, I agree it is not really on topic. However I would just like to mention that it seems my memory is flawed and Vince Cable was not in attendance at the Big Banking Debate, so apologies for getting that wrong on here.

 

Regarding the case this thread is about, I haven't heard any more news on this. I suspect that GLC will do all they can to take this case as far as possible, but it will undoubtedly be expensive so you've raised a valid point kenny.

[manchesteruni]

Thanks Caro, you had me thinking I was going mad then.

[means2anend]

A somewhat wise fellow I used to work with liked to say "people never seem to do what you expect them to do, but they almost always do what they know you will inspect them on." I have found this to be often true in many applications.

 

Caro, wasn't being cynical in my earlier comment, am always willing to give folk a try (at least I like to think so). I just wanted to caution folk into getting too excited about the many empty but moving promises doled out by many in positions of influence. If we hold ourselves and our leaders to account, and actually inspect and appraise their performances from time to time, we're more likely to get better 'service'.

 

Here here BTM...and I think that every 5 yrs is far too long!!!

 

m2ae

[Bigdebtor]

Not sure where bigdebtor saw CAG being listed in the official respondents tho I can't see them, good to see MSE on there tho, but of course anyone can respond in as much or as little detail as they wish.

 

It mentions Consumer Forums - not CAG.

 

BD

[manchesteruni]

Ahhh you meant MSE. Well why didn't you just say MSE lol, had me thinking I was barking again.

 

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/consumer-issues/docs/m/10-1185-managing-borrowing-call-for-evidence.pdf Annex D if anyone is interested.

[Fred_Funk]

 

Guys

 

I'm desperately seeking some assistance - at one point, I was fairly versed in all the arguments but this has been dragging on for so long that I'm now more than a little rusty.

 

I initiated a claim against NatWest back in January 2008 which, as you might imagine, has been on hold pretty much ever since. In July I received the attached correspondence from the court which, as I understand it, gives me until December 7 to apply for the stay which is currently in place to be removed or see the claim struck out.

 

In view of the ongoing legal battle being pursued by the Govan Law Centre and others, I'm reluctant to throw in the towel quite yet, especially as my Particulars of Claim relied not just on the penalties argument but referred also to Regulation 5 in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999. That being the case, what should I do?!

 

Common sense would suggest I write to the court asking for a further stay pending the resolution of the ongoing cases but the order of July 14 [see attached] seems to suggest my only option is to request the stay is lifted.

 

As ever, I'd be grateful for any advice. Thanks in anticipation.

 

Fred_Funk

[johnnymitch]

Hi Fred , I know what you mean , all the claims seem to be in limbo at the moment awaiting the GLC case .... but the fact that the banks are keeping their heads below the parapet is encouraging I'd say ... they may be scared of a further ruling going against them .. because they didn't get it all their own way at the SC appeal .............

 

Meanwhile , it might help to just ring the court office and explain that you are waiting (along with loads of others ) for a decisiont be made in a case which would affect how you proceed from here ........and could they give you advice on whether there is another option to the two they gave you ...i.e, is it possible to apply for a further extention to the stay .......

 

It would maybe help if you have tried to come to an agreement with HSBC following the court ruling .....and they haven't sparked on it ... as the court did say that efforts should be made in the interim to come to an agreement of sorts .....

 

Hope that helps ......

[Crazy Diamond]

It mentions Consumer Forums - not CAG.

 

BD

 

Ahhh you meant MSE. Well why didn't you just say MSE lol, had me thinking I was barking again.

 

 

Just to clarify, Consumer Forums is the generic name of CAG. HTH.

[Bigdebtor]

Thanks for your supporting clarification CD.

 

Man uni - I do know the difference between CF and MSE! I use both extensively.

 

BD

[manchesteruni]

My apologies BD, I just couldn't see ''Consumer Forums'' on the list anywhere, so thought you may have meant consumer forums in general (and MSE is the only one I could see on there). Could you point it out please as I'm interested to see any other parties listed as interested parties that aren't mentioned in Annex D of the consultation document.

 

Thanks.

 

MU.

[enaid]

__________________

Edited November 27, 2010 by enaid

[enaid]

I did a word search for 'forums' in the main document and all the other related documents and it didn't find it once.

 

Maybe Bigdebtor is getting confused with 'Consumer Focus' ?

__________________

[rdm2006]

Edit oops error

[manchesteruni]

Just a reminder, the deadline is 10th December for responses to this consultation.

 

If you can't be pooped doing the whole thing and giving your full views and ideas how the review of credit and insolvency should go forwards, then take a couple minutes to answer the survey - every little helps - https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GC9KQ5R

[manchesteruni]

Whole thing... http://www.bis.gov.uk/policies/consumer-issues/consumer-credit-and-debt/managing-borrowing

 

 

Go on..... you know you want to.

[caro]

I see Govan Law Centre are to be on Rip Off Britain discussing bank charges. http://govanlc.blogspot.com/

[Crazy Diamond]

Switching TV on now so as not to forget. Thanks.