Jump to content


How will the OFT decision impact on CAG?


indebtstudent
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5566 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

lol, yes , dont get me wrong im all in favour of dealing a blow to capitalism, indeed im merely playing devils advocate!

The banks do not want to challenge most claims because quite rightly the OFT's investigation is expected to draw the conclusion that it is unfair to charge anything over its recomendation. Now once that has been declared its kind of likle a guide to the banks what they might be able to argue as fair! However as you have mentioned it is true that ultimatley it is for the courts to make a precedent upon (something the banks are currently afraid of too) . personnaly , without playing advocate!! I would say the banks will avoid opening thier books etc and settle out of court, everyone knows it does not cost over £5 max in real cost to the banks.

Having said this as devils advocate, iw ould be keenly examining this report, recomendations , sure their lawyers will be doing so lol

Interesting debate though ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was pretty disappointed with Martin's report on the Tonight programme. I felt he didn't give particularly good advice. Also, not at all useful advice if you live in Scotland - the whole programme was only based on English law.

 

However, it was nice to be able to put some faces to my favourite names on the board!

 

Keep up the excellent work all!

Abbey - 547.00 settled in full.

Second claim: £204 WON.

Barclaycard - 142.88 incl interest due WON BY DEFAULT as they didn't even bother entering a defence. Barclaycard paid up £184.88.

 

MBNA - Concluded £634.31

Capital One Concluded £148

Kinda disappointed I've no more banks to go after now...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a little more info, I've been filling in my colleagues at work (Nationwide) about the law and one smart begger made the whole "the charges are not unlawful because they haven't been ruled on in court". I shut him up by saying that the only reason they hadn't been ruled on in court is nobody would defend a case.

 

What is the score re test cases? Have there just been none?

 

Back to my topic, my understanding of the OFT decision on credit cards is thus -

 

We could carry out a long investigation to determine what we will set as the figure but instead lets make it significantyl lover to benefit people now.

 

I got a charge refunded from MBNA with a letter I constructed myself (before I discovered CAG!) so I would say, if a similar ruling is made re banks charges continue to claim I don't think the banks will defend...

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Advoc8 (clever name - I like a good pun!). Basically what happens is lower court do decide cases but, if they err and it gets appealed, a higher court can give a definitive decision and it is this that sets the precedent. This is why if you lose in the House of Lords you tend to feel a little down (unless you're covered by european law!).

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a little more info, I've been filling in my colleagues at work (Nationwide) about the law and one smart begger made the whole "the charges are not unlawful because they haven't been ruled on in court". I shut him up by saying that the only reason they hadn't been ruled on in court is nobody would defend a case....

 

The law on penalty's is quite clear and has been settled for a long time -

 

What is the score re test cases? Have there just been none?

 

 

None in a high court, although Citi was ordereded full disclosure in the Mercantile but defaulted and paid the claimant in full.

 

Back to my topic, my understanding of the OFT decision on credit cards is thus -

 

We could carry out a long investigation to determine what we will set as the figure but instead lets make it significantyl lover to benefit people now.

 

Back to my topic, my understanding of the OFT decision on credit cards is thus -

 

We could carry out a long investigation to determine what we will set as the figure but instead lets make it significantyl lover to benefit people now.

 

 

The ydid carry out a long investigation, and they cannot set a figure, the only figure they have set is the point they will intervene.

Consumer Health Forums - where you can discuss any health or relationship matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I'm getting at, they def did not say £12 is lawful and the same thing would apply to bank charges surely.

 

In any event I've checked out the moneysaving expert forum and Martin has clarified his position. What he was getting at was that after the OFT reports back there may be an extra hurdle for consumer in that banks will try to use the ruling.

 

Personally I would continue as normal, we just might need to add a little to templates...

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In any event I've checked out the moneysaving expert forum and Martin has clarified his position. What he was getting at was that after the OFT reports back there may be an extra hurdle for consumer in that banks will try to use the ruling.

 

Personally I would continue as normal, we just might need to add a little to templates...

 

I've checked it too, and I am horrified by the level of alarmist nonsense going on.

 

I think Martin is completely mistaken. If last year's events are anything to go by, reclaiming will be easier, not harder.

 

At the moment, it is us v big bad bank saying the charges are unlawful, and them saying: Oh no, it's not.

 

Once the OFT sets their intervention threshold, the banks will be faced with the fact that a government regulatory body is agreeing with us in saying that their charges are too high. We will then be able to incorporate this into our court evidence to show the judge...

 

Let's not forget that a penalty is non-enforceable in its entirety. Therefore, there is no question of part-settlement, no question of difference between the OFT's intervention threshold and current charges.

 

It's 100%, full stop. The only change needed to the templates should be to change the date of the OFT report once this ones comes out. We take the high ground, and we keep it, as always. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...