Jump to content


Judges getting fed up *all read*


scott150663
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5246 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

Claim cases warning for banks

 

 

 

 

dot.gif

 

 

 

 

20070515050309990004.4649775a-0018c-05269-400cb8e1

Fees for unauthorised credit are as high as £39

 

 

 

Banks have been warned by a High Court judge to stop putting unnecessary pressure on customers seeking to reclaim "unfair" penalty charges.

Judge David Mackie QC said some banks had employed tactics that placed needless work and anxiety on claimants seeking to take their current account provider to court.

As such, he warned banks that such behaviour would be deemed to be "unreasonable" and could open the way for claimants to demand further compensation.

The comments made at London Mercantile Court highlighted a growing frustration within the legal community over the lack of a test case over the legal status of fees that can go as high as £39 for going over an agreed overdraft limit.

 

Judge Mackie said: "Over 300 cases have now been referred to this court, over 140 in April alone. There has been no test case decision because despite putting in detailed written defences the banks have always settled or paid up shortly before or at the hearing.

"On the face of things, each case raises serious issues which a court would permit to proceed to trial. But this is fantasy because, at least for the moment, we all know that there will be no trial."

Judge Mackie noted that in some instances banks had requested detailed information from claimants as if a case were heading for trial.

 

"Looked at in the real world where there will be no trial, these steps, which place completely pointless work and some anxiety on litigants in person, constitute unreasonable behaviour," he said.

As such, claimants who have been put to unnecessary work and inconvenience may be entitled to compensation.

Judge Mackie added: "Of course a claimant may in some cases face the same risk if he or she behaves unreasonably."

Brian Capon, spokesman for the British Bankers' Association, said banks take the court process "very seriously" but that ultimately they prefer to settle disputes with customers outside the court room.

"Where a customer's complaint dates back over a long period or is complex the bank will need longer to investigate the complaint properly," he said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantasy

In such cases banks have so far settled out of court, usually a few days before their case is due to be heard.

o.gifstart_quote_rb.gif This is fantasy because, at least for the moment, we all know that there will be no trial end_quote_rb.gif

 

 

Judge David Mackie QC

 

 

Expressing some frustration at this situation, Judge Mackie said: "On the face of things each case raises serious issues which the court would permit to proceed to trial.

"But this is fantasy because, at least for the moment, we all know that there will be no trial."

Brian Capon, of the British Bankers Association, defended the stance taken by banks saying they were confident their fees are legal.

"They take the court process very seriously, but ultimately they would prefer to settle disputes with their customers outside the court process," he said.

"Where a customer's complaint dates back over a long period or is complex the bank will need longer to investigate the complaint properly."

The consumers association Which? rejected this.

"It seems that the banks are deliberately dragging their feet in the hope that their customers will either give up or accept part of the money they are owed," said a spokeswoman.

Unreasonable behaviour

Judge Mackie pointed out that in some cases bank customers had tried to claim damages for stress and inconvenience.

Such claims have been unsuccessful so far, but he warned he would award damages in future if banks and their lawyers continued to:

  • fail to respond to some claimants letters
  • fail to negotiate for months and until a hearing date is set
  • demand extra information from the claimants, knowing they had no intention letting a court hear the matter
  • settle the case without telling the claimants they need not attend court
  • fail to show up in court

"Looked at in the real world where there will be no trial these steps, which place completely pointless work and some anxiety on litigants in person, constitute unreasonable behaviour," said Judge Mackie.

"From now on we will generally be treating such conduct as unreasonable behaviour thus enabling any claimant who has been put to unnecessary work and inconvenience to be compensated for this."

Frustration

Judge Mackie's comments appear to reflect growing judicial annoyance at the banks' attempts to avoid a test case at all costs.

o.gifstart_quote_rb.gif It would be helpful if there was a decision taken at High Court level to clarify the situation Nationwide end_quote_rb.gif

 

 

Judge Roger Kaye QC

 

 

Last month, Leeds Mercantile Court listed 77 cases in one day, all of which were settled out of court.

Afterwards, Judge Roger Kaye QC said "it would be helpful if there was a decision taken at High Court level to clarify the situation nationwide".

In Bristol County Court a successful claimant was recently awarded £84.41 in costs as the judge ruled Lloyds TSB wasted the court's time because it had had no intention of defending the claim.

In January, a Judge at Lincoln County Court threatened to strike out some banks' defences for abusing the legal process for the same reason.

At the time Judge Paul Collins, speaking on behalf of county court judges in London, said: "It would be very desirable to have a test case to see whether the arguments being put forward by the banks are sustainable or not," he said.

The latest warning from Judge Mackie left the banks with what sounded like a final warning. "There may be a need for a more radical approach if the number of cases continues to grow," he said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At last the penny is starting to drop. :)

A person is only as big as the dream they dare to live.

 

 

Good things come to he who waits

 

 

Its your money taken unlawfully from your account and you have a legal right to claim it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Cobbetts CPR18 is a thing of the past for NatWest claimants?

 

Good.

 

T.

"Weasel (n): any person or group that operates in that vast grey area between good ethical behaviour and the sort of activities that might send you to jail".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like its about to get really interesting doesn't it.................:grin: :grin: :grin:

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! Big cheers and claps for a judge who's finally gotten' sick to death of the banks messing everyone around!!!

 

Cheers Scott - that made great reading! Hedgey xxxx :p

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah but is this a spanner in the works?????

 

Bank's overdraft charges upheld

 

_42926285_lloydstsbbranchbbc203.jpg Lloyds TSB has become the first bank to win a charges case

 

Lloyds TSB has become the first bank to win a court case after being sued by a customer for imposing supposedly unfair overdraft penalty charges.

District Judge Cooke, at Birmingham County Court, dismissed a claim for £2,545 from Kevin Berwick.

Mr Berwick argued Lloyds TSB's charges for having an unauthorised overdraft were illegal contractual penalties.

But Judge Cooke decided the bank's charges were in fact legitimate fees for servicing an overdrawn account.

As such, the judge said they were legal.

"Having held that the charges complained of are not charges for breach of contract but part of the price of the services provided by the bank....he has not satisfied me that he has any ground in law for recovering from the bank the amount of any charges which he has paid to it," he said.

Lloyds TSB said it was pleased with the ruling.

"It appears to acknowledge our position in respect of current account service charges," said a spokeswoman.

"The court has agreed with us that these are charges for a service and not default or penalty fees as has been argued by others," she added.

Blow to claimants?

As this judgment has come from a district judge, it is not binding on any other court, in the way that a High Court judgment might be.

o.gifREAD THE JUDGEMENT

 

 

Approved judgement [424KB]

 

Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader

Download the reader here

 

inline_dashed_line.gif

Was victory an accident?

 

 

However, as the first judgment of any kind in this sort of case, it could be a blow to the hundreds of thousands of people who are still trying to claim that they have been overcharged by their banks for running unauthorised overdrafts.

So far, many claimants have been successful because their banks have settled their cases before the issue came before a judge, precisely in order to avoid an adverse legal decision.

Now, the first decision in which a judge has given an opinion on the law has gone in a bank's favour.

Marc Gander, of the Consumer Action Group, a leading bank charges campaign, said he was very disappointed.

"We feel the judge has not considered the fact that disguising penalties as a fee for a service is a very common device for circumventing established law.

"The judge appears not to have looked behind the words on the contractual document," he said.

Possible appeal

Although Mr Berwick turned up at the original hearing in Birmingham to argue his case and was questioned by the judge, Lloyds TSB chose not to attend and relied simply on a written defence which it had submitted in advance.

Neither did the bank have any lawyers present in court when the judgment was handed down.

Mr Berwick said he was annoyed by the outcome of his claim. "I was expecting to win as I made a good job of arguing my case," he said. He is now considering an appeal after the judge gave him leave to do so.

I won against MBNA, Nat West , Barclays, Barclaycard and PPI payments from Barclaycard

Abbey National still to go.... what will I do with my spare time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm.........not sure about this one!!!!

 

But I reckon the judge was probs a crusty old git who used to work for a bank!!!!!

 

Let's hope so anyway.......... cos filed my N1 today - and we're on egg and chips until the money comes through now!!!!

 

xxxxxxxxx :p

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw it mentioned on one of the other forums, that this will probably be quite dangerous, maybe making people accept smaller settlements/GOGW just in case it does go to court?

I won against MBNA, Nat West , Barclays, Barclaycard and PPI payments from Barclaycard

Abbey National still to go.... what will I do with my spare time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult to suss this one out methinks.......... cos all other judges have just awarded up until now!! I reckon we need to see what the appeal comes up with - cos if it's upheld at appeal I reckon we've all got trouble!!!! TBH.......... I'm just glad I've not claimed O/D interest!!! Selfish I know........... but phew!!!!!!!!! xxxx :p

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hedgey, fingers crossed it'll be steak and chips soon :D

jaxads

 

Halifax - £2281, successfully refunded all charges after LBA letter & telephone call.

Have been offered the difference between the £20 and £12 charges from Capital One -- am sending LBA for remainder.

GE Money - Received settlement of £441, being total charges requested. No interest though.

CCA'd Bank of Scotland / Blair Oliver Scott to produce CCA Agreements on two Credit Cards - well in default, although still chasing payment!!!

EOS Solutions "ceased action on account" on behalf of a friend.

 

All in all, quite busy at the moment and enjoying every minute of it
:eek:

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I`m in the process of working my charges and interest out, with the few statements nat west have decided to send me, I have to be honest, I was`nt sure whether to claim the interest or not, because some of it is from an overdrawn account, (thats an agreed o/d). Perhaps its better to work out both and decide on the day in case of further developments. Don`t want to miss out now. If anyone has any other possibilities please comment.....bob m.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hedgey, I havent charged OD interest on either of my current account claims (Nat West and Abbey) But I have charged MBNA and Barclaycard, hope that doesn't make a difference.

I won against MBNA, Nat West , Barclays, Barclaycard and PPI payments from Barclaycard

Abbey National still to go.... what will I do with my spare time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I haven't claimed o/d interest either, but am definitely not gonna file in Birmingham now, think I'll file in Walsall instead! Just have to see what impact this has on the rest of the courts.

 

Wendy

Link to post
Share on other sites

from reading tho the judges decision i feel the claimant was hard done by but through not usuing the correct POC etc he has himself to blame for losing the case(incidently lloyds did fax the court offering full payment to the claimant)they didnt expect to win either........................

 

It would seem the bases of his claim is for O/D interest that has been charged to his account (i think to claim this you would need to prove that your overdraft is adirect result of unlawful charges,as we dont have access to the claimants schedule of charges etc we cant see exactly where he went wrong .......

 

in my opinion i think he cut to many corners (look at the POC) we all know and understand that there is a proven procedure to follow......................If u cant 100% prove that o/d interest is a result of unlawful charges DONT CLAIM IT..

 

this will give the banks some hope so lets make sure that we do things right from PRELIM all the way to the conclusion of the claim..

 

There are 2 ways to reclaim your charges back

 

1 the CAG way

2 the wrong way

 

As far as im aware no cag member has lost a case WHY??? cause we do it correctly.......

 

If u want your money back dont CUT corners

 

 

any comments welcome

 

Scott

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only comment I can add is ............. well said Scott!!!! We either do it the CAG way, or the wrong way!!! So keep going folks - just follow every step to the letter!!!! xxxxxxx :p :p :p

Can't find what you're looking for? Please have a look at Michael Browne's

A-Z Guide

*** PLEASE NOTE ***

I do not answer queries via PM. If you send me a PM, please include a link to your thread - any advice I am able to offer will be on your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott, dead right. You do know one guy is a CAG member? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/35751-kevboy_telford-lloyds.html

A person is only as big as the dream they dare to live.

 

 

Good things come to he who waits

 

 

Its your money taken unlawfully from your account and you have a legal right to claim it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i read the thread last night

 

Hopefully he will appeal as i cant see WHY he lost, he must be damn unlucky..........it could turn into a blessing tho..........i cant see the bank risking losing the appeal..........

 

scott

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...