ruling today at Hull

[jec]

Anybody heard on this one yet???? Precedent?? What next?

 

Jec

[bally35]

What? Please expand

[jec]

Judge Ian Besford is threatrrening to strike out over 44 case today in favour of bank services not charges. CAG have arrange for a barrrister to assist.

[bally35]

nah , I tjought that you had news.

DOH

[jec]

No crystal ball here, sorry bally.

[hedgey06]

Good news on this one Big Victory in Hull Court - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

[Kevboy_telford]

also see here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/94839-hull-county-court-strike-4.html

[diabolical]

and here

BBC NEWS | Business | Bank to face penalty fees D-Day

[PI Guy]

great news!!!!

[hedgey06]

Just a bit!

[jec]

A great big thankx should go out to all those who volunteered I say!!!!

Glad you are all on our side.

 

Jec

[Bookworm]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

[stevepm]

Good one Guys

Lets keep up the Good fight

StevePM

[hello1000]

Great news all round.... but i do feel the banks will settle rather than revealing their cost's (hopefully not:) but have they got the ball's??)

[nevos]

Interesting Conclusion: Judge Besford is a bright cookie, concentrated everyones minds! Hull,contrary to popular belief is not the last bastion of the British Empire

[N£m£sis]

Fantastic news for everybody. Hats off to MSE and CAG, you've played an absolute blinder!

N£mEsis.

[bandonbhoy]

Enjoying the celebrations and offering my sincerest congratulations.

But can someone please explain in simpler language what has happened.

 

As I am reading the posts, there was a QC available to assist our clients defend their cases if required.

 

The banks settled most cases.

 

Did the judge then award the claimants in remaining cases judgement to them?

Did the judge order the banks to reappear and present the evidence to the court of how the charges are actually calculated and fully explain each and every different charge?

Will this judgement be allowed as a precedent for all other cases? In England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales?

If th banks dont reappear what effect will this have on the judge?

Will this judgen=ment be ;transg=ferble ' to thsoe banks not present at today's hearing?

 

If a Mod can please explain.

 

Thanks

[em_19uk]

great news can't wait to see the outcome

[Bookworm]

Enjoying the celebrations and offering my sincerest congratulations.

But can someone please explain in simpler language what has happened.

 

As I am reading the posts, there was a QC available to assist our clients defend their cases if required.

 

The banks settled most cases.

 

Did the judge then award the claimants in remaining cases judgement to them?

Did the judge order the banks to reappear and present the evidence to the court of how the charges are actually calculated and fully explain each and every different charge?

Will this judgement be allowed as a precedent for all other cases? In England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales?

If th banks dont reappear what effect will this have on the judge?

Will this judgen=ment be ;transg=ferble ' to thsoe banks not present at today's hearing?

 

If a Mod can please explain.

 

Thanks

 

None of the above.

 

This judge wanted to throw out 44 cases on the strength of the Berwick v LTSB case a few weeks previously, where another judge had ruled in favour of the bank (the "service" argument). The judge in Hull said that he wanted to throw out those case as they had no reasonable chance of success. He however allowed the claimants to object to his decision and present him with arguments not to dismiss those claims, hence today's hearing.

 

Interesting to note that so many banks settled as fast as they could before the hearing, despite the fact that the judge seemed to think they had no chance of success, but I digress.

 

So, of the cases left now, they are proceeding to Small Claims, as if the judge hadn't ordered the strikeout in the first place. The difference is that he has ordered the banks to disclose how they calculate their costs, which is the last thing the banks wanted!

 

How does it affect the rest of us? Well, for starters, I think it is unlikely any judge will order the same thing now, which would have been a real risk otherwise, and could have caused non-ending problems for claimants.

 

It also shows the banks that we are better organised, and better armed than they thought, not just a bunch of amateurs downloading random templates and hoping for the best, and that this consumer revolution is going further and deeper than they could have imagined, and that they won't be able to just bully us into scurrying back into our holes.

[bandonbhoy]

I have been busy doing spreadsheets all night and did not have opp to go back to mail until now. I laughed at your first line. You must get frustrated with eedjits like myself. So this judge was going to throw them out based on the previous guy throwing cases out, but the sight of our QC and the facts caused the banks to settle as many cases as possible. And getting them to discose and telling them to do that? Its almost a better bet that they wont than laura getting booted out of bb this friday.

calculating the charges that hbos owes me is £14.5k and interest of additional £3.905.

 

methinks i will try phone call tomorrow.

 

Thanks again

[nevos]

Yorkshire Bank has been told that it may have to outline the "true cost" of bank penalty charges it imposes. Judge Iain Besford made the remark at Hull County Court when hearing seven claims for refunds of bank charges.

Originally, 44 claims were to be heard but most were settled earlier, some just minutes before the court hearing.

Of the seven cases heard, four were sent to a lower court where the judge said if the bank contested it would have to explain its charging structure.

Disclosure order......... There is a report here BBC

[Kevboy_telford]

this was on Look north

BBC - Humber - Homepage

 

click on watch now (dont know how long it will be before todays takes over!)

and goto about 5 mins in

 

watch and enjoy