Sheriff puts Bank of Scotland to proof on bank charges

[GuidoT]

Ah well, that is where Anthony Scrivener and I disagree.

 

Where does it say in law that "once such benefits are paid into a current account, they no longer benefit from such statutory protection"? Indeed, how is this possible when benefits MUST be paid into a bank account, thereby making the intended recipient the last person to access those benefits? I'd appreciate a link to the piece of legislation/precedent on which Mr Scrivener bases his opinion.

 

Whilst it could be argued that when you went to the PO and cashed your Giro and then put the money in the bank, you were at that point entrusting the bank with your money to do as they wished, there is no way this argument can stand at a time where that method of payment is no longer an option. Even if you go to the bank on the day your benefits arrive and want to withdraw it all, you may not be allowed to if there are charges pending.

 

As for the right of appropriation, the argument was first used by CAG to help people and as you correctly say has been by and large ignored by most banks.

 

Old Bookie will argue with anyone.

 

Do not start it is not an argument argument (it is a debate).

Edited July 23, 2010 by GuidoT

[GuidoT]

Be careful, if your claim is not on the small claims track and you discontinue, you will be automatically liable for the other sides legal costs.

[GuidoT]

I have completed it, takes about 3 minutes, but it is a poorly structured and to place it on a site called Survey Monkey does not exactly enhance its credibility.

[GuidoT]

That is good news, Mr Dailly fought properly hard for this.

 

http://govanlc.blogspot.com/search/label/Sharp%20v%20Bank%20of%20Scotland%20plc

Edited March 19, 2011 by GuidoT
Added link

[GuidoT]

Fireprism, although you have not won, I have not heard of this happending before.

 

You should start you own thread.

 

Have you drafted your amended pleadings?

[GuidoT]

Dailly lets rip over bank complaints

 

 

Share

18 Jun 2011

Mike Dailly, the solicitor at Govan Law Centre who helped lead the consumer campaign against unfair bank charges, harangued bankers on behalf of the Financial Services Consumer Panel this week.

 

Mr Dailly told a British Bankers Association seminar: “Most consumers don’t like complaining. That may seem an odd thing to say when there were almost two million bank complaints ‘logged’ from customers in the UK last year, with one million of those relating to current accounts.”

 

However less than one third of consumers would pursue a complaint in the teeth of a bank response, with only 9% prepared to seek redress from the Financial Ombudsman Service. He went on: “So why do most people give up? Could it be that if the process of complaining is more time consuming and irksome than the cause of the grievance, most consumers will decide to cut their losses?”

 

Mr Dailly concluded: “Consumers deserve fairer outcomes and banks need to start rebuilding their damaged reputation by putting customers at the heart of their service, to retain their loyalty and money.”

[GuidoT]

Consumer panel calls for end to free banking

 

SIMON BAIN

Share

18 Jun 2011

Mike Dailly, the solicitor who helped lead the consumer campaign against unfair bank charges, has said free banking will have to end to allow proper competition in the current account market.

Mr Dailly, principal solicitor at Govan Law Centre, was appointed to the Financial Services Consumer Panel 18 months ago and was making his first public comments as a panel member.

He told an audience of 120 bankers in London that the panel would like to see an end to free banking for those in credit, as it was preventing new banks from challenging the “big five” who held 87% of current accounts.

Mr Dailly said: “We would like to see charges related to the cost of the bank providing a particular service for a particular individual, in order to provide genuine full transparency in the UK current account market.”

In 2006 Govan Law Centre launched the campaign which saw more than 1.1 million customers claim an estimated £1.7 billion in refunds from the banks. All complaints were frozen in July 2007 and in November 2009 the Supreme Court ruled against a test case brought by the office of Fair Trading. Govan Law Centre however is continuing to pursue cases in the small claims court using different legal grounds.

Mr Dailly commented: “There is no doubt that the consumer panel is incredibly frustrated with what has happened with overdraft charges and we are trying to find a way forward. There needs to be transparency for people to be able to compare different services from different banks.”

Brian Mairs at the British Bankers Assocation commented: “Our members are committed to maintaining the free in-credit banking model because customers have demanded it.”