Oh The Audacity of DG

[Audreygreeneyes]

Thanks Lattie that is what I am hoping ( but doubt it will happen)........... Thanks for that link Pete, have read it and think that as on my instruction from the court it does state that it may be treated as a TEST CASE this is what the district judge will do , given today's news.

 

Freaky before today my answer would have been very doubtful but now am not so sure, the banks must be fairly sure it is going to go in their favour, if not fully they will at least get what the courts feel is a fair charge.... possibly the same as the credit card companies last year.... oitherwise why would they have agreed to it.......

 

What I need now is a VERY GOOD arguement for opposing a stay if the judge decides to grant one..........

 

I am hoping that as it is only 12 days away it will go ahead.....

[freakyleaky]

I think the worst outcome would be that the oft would decide that a small percentage of the charges were justified but anything over and above would have to be returned upon request. And I don't think the allowable ammount would be anywhere near £35. But that is just my take on it!

[Castlebest]

do you read anything I write Auburn ? I think the banks have been forced into this position and about time too !!!

 

pete

[Audreygreeneyes]

I think you have hit the nail on the head Pete, this is the way the bank are going to limit their losses £18 to £23 per charge is better than £30 or £35 so they will save some money..........

[freakyleaky]

Where did you get those figures from Auburn?

[Audreygreeneyes]

Erm yes I did read it Pete, just wish they had waited 14 days before doing it...................lol

[Audreygreeneyes]

they charge £30 or £5 so if you take of the £12 that they allowed the credit card companies that leaves you with £18 or £23..............lol

[Castlebest]

errrr.... Auburn ... was maths part of your typing course too ?

 

pete

[Audreygreeneyes]

Erm Pete £30- 12 is 18 and 35 - 12 is 23......

[freakyleaky]

they charge £30 or £5 so if you take of the £12 that they allowed the credit card companies that leaves you with £18 or £23..............lol

[Castlebest]

agreed... but why deduct what the credit card companies seem to think they are allowed to charge and say the remander is what the banks will charge ?... I think if a charge is set it will be the same as the credit card companies £12,,,,,,

 

pete

[Audreygreeneyes]

Ok I missed the 3 off the £5 it should have been £35........lol.......

 

if they do set it the same then I think we wil only be able to claim the difference. which is the 18 or 23

[Castlebest]

we will have to wait and see

 

pete

[freakyleaky]

I think that the figure will be more like the true cost which is probably around £2.00!

[Audreygreeneyes]

am off to bed you lot good night and god bless

[kingdom]

The consumer started to get some power which effected the whole corrupt system.

 

The banks were creating all the consumer complaints to OFT so OFT was fed up with the getting all the complaints, and having the courts judging the banks, because the consumer's started to benefit by receiving their hard earned money back, which they paid unlawfully, it all had to stop because we are supposed to pay them, not them pay us.

 

What a cover up

 

Regards

 

kingdom

[freakyleaky]

I understand your cynicism with regards to this but lets wait to see the outcome of the test case. I hope we can all have a little faith in the judicial system to do the right thing.

If they don't then I will give up!

[Castlebest]

Spain looks good Freaky, although I think you will have to switch your allegence from sheep to goats

 

pete

[freakyleaky]

Or bulls!

 

(couldn't think of any other animals in spain LOL)

[Castlebest]

you would need a strong fence to keep your bullocks in

 

pete

[freakyleaky]

With 2504 posts I could build a strong fence! LOL:D

[Audreygreeneyes]

the oft must have a very sore rear end am really surprised they can sit on it given the amount of splinters they have got in it from fence sitting............

 

anyone heard anything about how it went at the high court today.???

[Castlebest]

I'm waiting for the "OFT v HSBC" thread to appear so we can help them

 

pete

[Audreygreeneyes]

The OFT and all 7 banks have struck some kind of deal.........the most likely I think is they willa gree the charges are unfair. pay them out but not include the interest...... thus saving them money......

 

The OFT have said yeah ok thats fair, which is why htis all came out of the blue..........we are hurting them......

 

Minbd you obviously not the Alliance & Leicester cos they jsut announced £300 million pounds or it might have been billion. cant remember .........lol............

[Castlebest]

Dont think so, your probably right that we wont get all we want but thats just life and the old boy network (a lot of the OFT and FSA personel are ex bank).

 

I do think the Judicary have had an input into this, why have the banks suddenly agreed to a court case to set president after running away for so long?

 

The directions we have been getting from the various regional County Courts have slowly been increasing the pressure on the banks solicitors to prove they are actualy going to court or face a strike out of their defence, if this had carried on the banks would have been faced with absolutly no defence against unlawful charges claims.

 

This way I think they can seek to minimise their losses

 

pete