Jump to content


Lloyds TSB Won!!! Read Now


williamtcforsyth
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5481 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

Look at link and read below

 

Link - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6657025.stm

 

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 Cook, 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 Cook 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.

 

Mr Berwick said he was annoyed by the outcome. "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.

 

Blow to claimants?

 

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

 

However, as the first judgement 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.

 

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 judgement was handed down.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6657025.stm

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually this isn't the first time it's happened. Several years ago Nat West won a case using essentially the same legal argument. In that case and I suspect this one, the claimant didn't deploy the correct argument to defeat this preposterous interpretation of the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sent my LBA off and have to admit despite winning previously with Nationwide twice. Im worried of the impact this will have. was it contractual interest that the client had tried to claim for. Dont understand how when so many cases have been won, this one was thrown out?

muffintop

Won Nationwide £900 and £1908 Bank Charges

Lloyds personal account 1,861

Lloyds Bus Account 2k

Abbey bank acc. Stayed 2008

 

CCA requested Barclaycard Nov 08 - n1 issued - GAVE UP

CCA Mbna Nov 08- n1 issued - GAVE UP

Marks and Spencer Money Nov 08 -lost found 2b enforceable.

Tomson Holiday - WON

 

if I help you tip my little scales it gives me a thrill. MT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't he also have claimed for unlawful charges and not 'illegal' charges. Could simple terminology like this be enough to loose the case. I think also - he has the opportunity to appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what has been said and by hints in the article, this guy didn't really prepare properly.

 

I guess what we can all learn from this situation is that, don't go to court unles you prepaired to prepare a statement explaining the charges etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, also spotted this news item and it is a shame but you have to prepare properly and ask for help if you dont understand it, better to ask than have this happen.

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it not be a victory in disguise? If he decides to appeal the decision in the High Court and he was eventually victorious would this then not set a precedent for us all. Maybe it's the judges way of forcing the banks hand because in the high court they would finally have to disclose the information regarding the actual cost of their charges which to date they have still not done. At the end of the day at the moment these cases are clogging up the court system and maybe this action could put an end to them once and for all with the banks having no option but to pay up and avoid the uneccessary stalling tactics which they are employing at the mo.......heres hoping:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without being a doomsayer...having read the judgement, it looks like the claimant was well prepared. There were two cases heard and one of them 'Haughton' didn't even submit Sched of Charges.

The case in question 'Berwick' the Judge stated had a well prepared case, and was in fact "a model litigant".

 

In two minds myself as to what to do. Tempted to go ahead as there is little to lose (financially!)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

First Direct - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 29/12/06

Statements recieved 15/1/07 - >£3000 owed

Prelim sent 16.01.07

Partial offer received 01.02.2007

LBA and letter rejecting paltry offer sent 02.02.2007

MCOL filed mid Feb 07

AQ 26th March

 

 

BoS - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 29/12/06

Statements received 1.02.2007 - Prelim sent 02.02.2007

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5481 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...