Tom Brennan v NatWest - This is a must-read!!!

[PPMAN159]

Up until now none of the banks have defended a case in court and as such what do they have up their sleeves for this one?

 

I feel that they are on a hiding to nothing-if they do not defend then that is an admission that their charges are not justified and yet if they go to court I do not see what stance they can take to justify.

 

Also Tom has 'expert witnesses' who he claims can prove that it only costs the banks £2.50 to bounce a cheque rather than the £38 that they charge us.

[Glenn UK]

PPMAN the banks dont have a choice in this claim at the moment, the claim is about Brennan asking the court to allow the case to continue on the basis that the bank should pay exemplary damages.

 

Its not a hearing to determine if the charges are lawful, this would effectively be one of the outcomes should the court allow the claim to continue I believe.

 

glenn

[PPMAN159]

Cheers Glenn

 

I must have misread the situation

[cassie2006]

Hi All

 

Hope you don't mind but this is a post I made an another thread earlier today.

 

 

 

Hi Guys

 

I'm really disappointed this has been delayed.

 

Just one point to make:

 

this case wasn't about bank charges - he's already been offered 4K even though he was (only) claiming 2.5K.

 

this case was about compensation. as we all know some of us have been put into serious financial difficulty due to the bank charges e.g. bankruptcy, loss of homes, etc.

 

This case is far from over - I think the judge realises this could be a long drawn out one - so he has delayed it so the Court could allocate more time to it.

 

Just my thoughts:-)

 

 

 

I am (cautiously) thinking that the banks might want to settle with us

claiming bank charges because if he wins the compensation argument............................... Well, who knows???

 

Cassie

[PPMAN159]

So can expect to see a flood of settlememnt letters over the next few weeks from Nasty Vest prior to the case being reheard?

[HighgateLad]

Tom Brennan may be onto something with his point on exemplary damages. Does anybody know how to contact Mr Brennan?

[MattyH]

Looks like Tom Brennans case has been postponed:

 

Sky News: Showdown Over Bank Fees

 

According to the statement made by Brennan on the above site, he's only claiming for 6 years of charges...

 

However, on this website ( http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcement.php?f=6&a=80 ) it states that we can now claim more than 6 years. Shouldn't someone tell him??

 

Matt

[PPMAN159]

[email protected]

[crashdown]

So how does this affect people with claims already in motion? I've just sent off my first claim to Abbey and wonder if they'll try and delay until this case is settled or can I still push ahead with my claim?

[cassie2006]

I really don't know PPMAN - stranger things have happened;)

 

I'm so wrapped up in my claim against Abbey, in a strange way:evil: this was a welcome distraction (of sorts).

 

I'm supposed to be working from home but I've spent most of the day reading and re-reading threads for information/inspiration/messages from above:p . Think I need (another) stiff drink:p

 

Good Luck to everyone.

[PPMAN159]

Continue with the claim-as far as I can see nothing has changed, no ruling has been made by the court so it is business as usual.

 

There are still the set timeframes that they have to abide by so carry on with the claim

[PPMAN159]

Thats the problem-this site is addictive.

 

Pass the bottle!

[crfx250]

Well after a couple of pints and a lengthy consultation with my outstanding and extremley bright bar maid, Brenda, I think todays postponment answers perhaps 3 of 4 crucial questions:

 

Did the judge throw the case out? - No

 

Did the judge deem Brennan a vexatious litigant - No

 

Is the judge taking Tom's case seriously and needs more court time? -Very possibly.

 

As to if m'learned got his oats last night, that one remains shrouded in mystery.

 

........................

 

 

 

The judge said the issues were "extremely important"

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Court adjourns bank charges case

[cassie2006]

In an earlier post on my thread I said I'd probably be spending all my money on rehab:p

[PPMAN159]

Case has been rescheduled for the 30th April

[cassie2006]

Thanks for the info PPMAN

 

I really thought it would be longer.

 

BUT

 

I work 1 minute from the Court where it was due to be heard, and I know although a lot of us travel into the City of London to work - the population of City residents is only about 6000 (don't quote me on that figure - I might be a bit out of date) so the City of London court may not be as busy as "our courts".

[PPMAN159]

Same here-I am over by Mansion House tube.

 

I would assume that the City of London court would deal with the more complex financial matters and not the run of mill stuff that you may get locally so on that basis they would not be as busy.

 

It is not long time to wait but is a hell of a time to keep your fingers crossed!

[Guest bong]

how unbelievable that he's only going for 6 years! can't be a CAG regular then!

 

And as he's already issued proceedings he doesn't need to be worried that the delay will affect the 6 years that are already in his claim. puzzling indeed, makes you wonder whether the reporter has ad libbed!

[cassie2006]

This court case is NOT for bank charges.

 

It's for compensation for hardship:mad: CAUSED by bank charges.

 

I may be very wrong but I think this is a very different case to ours.

 

Cassie

[Guest bong]

This court case is NOT for bank charges.

 

It's for compensation for hardship:mad: CAUSED by bank charges.

 

I may be very wrong but I think this is a very different case to ours.

 

Cassie

 

well as far as I know I think he thinks it is about charges, and exemplary damages. otherwise why would he be being hailed as the first person to get the charges issue inside the courtroom?

[cassie2006]

Maybe I've missed the point.

 

But as I have read it, he has been offered 4K for a claim of 2.5K charges.

 

He is taking it further than any of us would/could because he's in the "privileged??" position of being able to.

 

His argument/case is that due to these "unlawful??" bank charges he has "suffered further financial difficulties that wouldn't have arisen if he hadn't been charged the bank charges in the first place".

 

I realise this case "originated" because of bank charges.

[Guest bong]

I don't think he has accepted or acknowledged their payment of the charges. whatever theyve offered it hasnt fully satisfied his claim so he believes he can pursue the whole claim and the charges issue through the courts. Thats my take on it anyway.

[cassie2006]

Hi Bong

 

I need to read up on what he is actually fighting for.

 

I thought I read somewhere that he had refused their offer of 4K which is why this court case is so important to him.

 

I know a few people on this site are sceptical of his motives - but I've felt so secure here, I think I want to think the best of anyone who is fighting the banks :confused:

 

Am I gullible - maybe:oops:

 

Cassie

[Guest bong]

I think I will be allowed to quote from his web page, if not maybe a mod can let me know and I'll delete it

 

The next hearing is due to take place on the morning of Friday 13th April 2007 at the Mayor's and City of London County Court. This is not the hearing that will determine the lawfulness of those charges; that will be determined at the full trial at a later date. Friday’s hearing is an application to determine the law involved in this case.

 

and

 

Natwest is arguing that this case involves a breach of contract and should therefore be dismissed. Natwest is arguing that it has repaid the charges into my bank account and has now closed that account, and as a result there is no case to be heard, since exemplary damages are not recoverable in contract.

 

 

 

It should be noted that I have, to date, refused all offers from Natwest to settle this matter, and that the charges were refunded into my account without my permission, without any explanation, and against my express wishes. We will have to wait and see what the judge makes of these matters.

[fendyweather]

Nope even though I think he may have his own agenda, i.e. making a bit of a name for himself, I still dont blame him at all. I think we should hail him as a pioneer, win or lose.............. If there were more people like him in the world, willing to take a risk/chance for the good of the common people then it would be a better world we were living in. Whatever his reasons/motives, genuine or self seeking, I still think hes a brave brave man. And I would be very proud to say I knew him, IF I DID OF COURSE. Whatever the outcome........... I SINCERELY WISH HIM THE VERY VERY VERY BEST OF LUCK, and I shall be saying a few private mantras for him in my head............. Win or lose, it makes no difference to me, its the fact he was willing to TRY........... when a lot of us wouldnt have. Again, privilidged or not, he still is risking a lot PERSONALLY,, so the guy deserves a flippin medal in my book. And I always love a person who wants to try and kick against authority for the personal good of others. YAAAAAAAAAAAAY AND TRIPLE YAAAAAAAAAAAAAY FOR MR TOM BRENNAN. WHAT A ICCLE STAR. Fendy xxxxxx