Wouldn't it be better to work with the OFT than against it?

[whistleblowing fairy]

isn't working with the OFT better than not working with the OFT. At the end of the day we're the ones that signed contracts we didn't read saying that we didn't mind paying £20 every time we late or overlimit.

 

all these letters are all well and good at getting some charges refunded. but has anyone actually taken a bank to court and got everything back, plus legal fees paid by the bank?

[Bookworm]

isn't working with the OFT better than not working with the OFT.

 

Not if the OFT is going to cap charges at £15 (which is the rumour doing the rounds) which is still an unlawful charge, and people are going to stop reclaiming what's legitimately theirs "because the OFT said that was ok". Not when the OFT removed a member of the public at a peaceful demo because he wanted to ask some questions and get some less evasive answers. Not when the OFT are too scared of the very people they're supposed to be controlling to defend the people they're supposed to protect.

 

At the end of the day we're the ones that signed contracts we didn't read saying that we didn't mind paying £20 every time we late or overlimit.

 

At the end of the day, we're the ones who could read every single T&Cs of every single bank account and credit card in the country, and would still have no choice in the matter, since they all operate in the same manner. DO NOT ASSUME that we didn't read those terms. That is extremely patronising to all the people who come here.

At the end of the day, do not presume to tell us it's our fault when the banks act unlawfully.

 

all these letters are all well and good at getting some charges refunded. but has anyone actually taken a bank to court and got everything back, plus legal fees paid by the bank?

 

Er... yes... Why don't you have a quick look at the Litigation board, and read? And momentum is gathering, as DPA request and court claims are reaching their conclusions.

[Neo]

If the OFT set a limit for these charges and make tem ?legal? will this affect our right to claim them back??

[Bookworm]

I'm going to move this thread as we're hijacking Stuart's, and this is a different subject.

 

Good question.

 

Legally, no. It's still neither a genuine pre-estimate of losses, it's still a penalty, and the banks will still be making a huge profit from our breach of contract.

 

BUT I feel that a lot of people will only hear the part of the OFT capping and therefore will accept it as gospel. Look at the number of people who, even once informed about the unlawfulness of the charges, still believe "there's a catch" or "they'll get it back off me some other way".

 

I also think that it might embolden the banks in trying to fight it in court, where a judge might take at face value the OFT cap and rule against the litle people. I'm certain that they will use the cap as a further excuse to deter people from reclaiming their charges. And we all know that some people do give up at 1st or 2nd refusal.

[Spiceskull]

As Bookworm suggests, it would be fair to work with the OFT IF and only IF they were working with the consumers. As the rumour is that they are going to impose a £10/15 cap on charges, then clearly they are NOT working with the consumer, and therefore working with them would be pointless.

 

However, if they were to force the banks to demonstrate what is a fair and reasonable cost (ie, how much it costs the bank to correct our mistakes) and then published this as a fixed cost, and NOT a cap, then working with them would be a good idea.

 

I've a pretty good idea who the OFT will choose to listen to...which is why I will continue to press my claim against the bank...

[whistleblowing fairy]

 

At the end of the day, we're the ones who could read every single T&Cs of every single bank account and credit card in the country, and would still have no choice in the matter, since they all operate in the same manner. DO NOT ASSUME that we didn't read those terms. That is extremely patronising to all the people who come here.

At the end of the day, do not presume to tell us it's our fault when the banks act unlawfully.

 

I didn't mean to be patronising, it was meant in a light hearted jokey way. i did not read my t&c and the joke was made at that.

 

Er... yes... Why don't you have a quick look at the Litigation board, and read? And momentum is gathering, as Data Protection Act request and court claims are reaching their conclusions.

 

i'm sorry, i'm not great with computers. it took me a long time to figure out how to add a thread and i still can't open some of the folders. I was simply asking the question. I wasn't expecting someone to so openly and sarcastically mock my inability to use a computer. :cry:

[whistleblowing fairy]

This topic was closed on 03/07/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group