Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[MacBoy]

Another rambling thought to add to the mix - this is only an agreement between a state regulator and various commercial organisations. It might only take an independently-minded Judge or two to overrule it.

[MacBoy]

I agree Josie - good post. I think our interests been shabbily and arbitrarily treated here. One the one hand it's great that the law is being tested, but so far it appears this is being done with the main objective being to relieve the poor banks' suffering Let's hope the independently minded Jusges I referred to in my previous post, exist!

[ohare7707]

"surely if we can come up with other law that will support our argument then the courts will NOT be able to stay the action"

 

 

Fezzaboy has raised a good point here, surely there must be some other laws that have relevence to the reclaiming of bank charges. If another law is potentially quoted then surely the courts putting a stay on the case is totally out the question...

[Destinyofsouls]

The OFT's Mission statement on their web site:

The OFT is responsible for making markets work well for consumers. We achieve this by promoting and protecting consumer interests throughout the UK, while ensuring that businesses are fair and competitive

Now where's that number for the advertising standards authority?

[redsonja]

I have a question....

 

What is the effect of the banks who have not signed an agreement with the OFT for this?

 

Do they fall under the same rules or can we carry on as normal with these?

[Holdred]

I know this is upsetting a lot of people with claims in progress, but isn't this the final solution we all wanted? Pre 27th July we were relying on the interpretation of our local judges on the cases we put forward and were excited when Banks were faced with divulging their true costs?

[everyman06]

The OFT's Mission statement on their web site:

The OFT is responsible for making markets work well for consumers. We achieve this by promoting and protecting consumer interests throughout the UK, while ensuring that businesses are fair and competitive

 

Now where's that number for the advertising standards authority?

 

:D :D :D

 

that's a good one, LMFAO!!

[Fezzaboy599]

Hi

 

The other banks not included can sign up to the waiver. I am not expecting any of them to not do. The waiver allows them the freedom to keep charging without giving any refunds.

 

It is the courts allowing cases to be heard that is the critical factor, if that can be achieved then the FSA's decision has had no real effect in the short term.

[Nads]

Everyone make some noise, it's because of the strength of us consumers that we have gotten this far.

 

If we make enough noise, they will realise we are no longer prepared to take any more of their rubbish, exploitation and will expose their games.

 

Send in your evidence

 

We need your Terms and Conditions NOW. Past and present, anything that could be relevant. Particularly in need of T & Cs for Yorkshire Bank Please send to: evidence@consumeractiongr oup.co.uk

[MacBoy]

Funhat

I don't think that anyone would deny that it's a good thing the banks are being brought to heel in a test case; and one that may very well end up in our favour - but I think people are a little disturbed and suspicious by the sudden announcement, the strangely similar recorded messages the banks have made on their telephone banking services and the fact that a lot of people are may perceive this as a chummy little arrangement by the banks and the regulator to get the grubby punters off their backs for a while while they sort things out in their own clubby world

[Guest Wild Billy]

What a bunch of idiots! :o Some of the rubbish written in this thread is really beyond belief.

 

This is the test case that everyone was crying out for. It clarifies the law. It is important, more important than anyone's individual claim. Sure it's annoying but see the bigger picture here. It was going to happen sooner or later and it's happening now so put up with it.

 

And the nonsense about the banks knowing the outcome already and being in cahoots with the authorities is equally as dumb. C'mon! Haven't you heard about spin? How do you expect the banks to present it? You're pretty dumb if you're falling for it.

 

And the waiver is by the FSA. Not the OFT. And the "stays" are granted by the courts as part of the legal process. Some of you really should read the fine print... or even the large print and think about what is going on rather than following JFK style conspiracy theories.

 

Can people refrain from commenting if they have no idea.

[Fezzaboy599]

With All Due Respect Wild Bill

 

Peoples money is now being held up for potentially years. There would of been nothing wrong with the test case happening but there was no need for the waiver or the courts wanting to stay any cases.

[MacBoy]

Well I guess we can all go home now - that's cleared everything up for us, with insightful knowledge and razor-sharp intellect. What a 'bunch of idiots' we are!

[nicsussex]

Can people refrain from commenting if they have no idea.

 

Everyones opinion is equally relevant isn't it?

[GuidoT]

Please keep this thread civil, there is no need for personal attacks from anyone.

[everyman06]

With All Due Respect Wild Bill

 

Peoples money is now being held up for potentially years. There would of been nothing wrong with the test case happening but there was no need for the waiver or the courts wanting to stay any cases.

 

EXACTLY!!!

 

Wht do we have to wait for our money,but the banks can keep charging??

If this will clear up the legal issue once and for all,surely the 'ceasefire' should apply to both sides??

 

Sure the test case is a good thing,but the waiver and stay bit just sucks. I for my part am continuing my court case and will argue against a stay!!

[Bookworm]

Get your cases in as soon as possible, even if it means shortening your time tables.

Not if it means going against the CPR, no.

I honestly believe that no judge is going to effect a stay at this present time but I may well be wrong.

You already are. Romford has already stayed cases as of today, and the judge has stated that he will keep on doing so. I fully expect a certain judge in Birmingham to do so.

[peter534]

A friend of mine who is a solicitor says that "there isn't a District Judge in the land who will not accept the stay."

 

Does anyone think otherwise?

[FunnyMan]

Can I ask a simple question, forgive me but it is puzzling me, what right has the OFT to make this agreement with the banks on my or anybody else?

 

I am just starting my cases now and am puzzled why a Quango can dictate the law and how and when the Courts here the cases?

[Deso]

I agree a test case is good for the future roadmap of consumer banking, however, not at the expense of my consumer rights in being effectively denied my right to complain until this test case is a done deal.

 

And Im not an idiot, just sceptical of having my rights messed around without having any input. Atleast if I was an individual case I could put my own point of view forward, not a view deemed appropriate by a state appointed regulator who has yet to prove they are working for the consumer.

[Bookworm]

A friend of mine who is a solicitor says that "there isn't a District Judge in the land who will not accept the stay."

 

Does anyone think otherwise?

Absolutely. There are some judges who are well aware of the banks' tactics, and I think that the over-riding objective means that everyone should get fair treatment. If you have a case already going, and the bank doesn't comply with court directions, apply for strike-out. A fair judge will grant that rather than wait for the bank to apply for a stay. The OFT's decision does not supersede existing court directions.

[Bookworm]

Can I ask a simple question, forgive me but it is puzzling me, what right has the OFT to make this agreement with the banks on my or anybody else?

 

I am just starting my cases now and am puzzled why a Quango can dictate the law and how and when the Courts here the cases?

 

They're not.

 

The waiver related to "internal" complaints procedure, if you will: FOS and bank's own system.

 

If you file at court, it will get processed through. The difference is that the judge may decide to stay your case until resolution of this one (of his own initiative), or the bank will apply for the stay, which the judge may or may not grant.

[Boris303]

My case was heard at the London Merchantile Court on the 20th July 2007, the judge asked if Barclays bank intended to defend any or all of the 18 cases against it for that day.

 

The bank then replied it did intend to defend all 18 cases, so Judge Mackie CBE Q.C then said that all 18 cases would be heard the same day in court on the 19th October 2007.

 

In light of these recent develpoments, does this mean that my case and the 17 others will be stayed untill the test case is resolved? Or will mny case ever get to court, because i have little hope right now.

[nearlyoldwoman]

Can people refrain from commenting if they have no idea.

 

with all respect, it's cos we have no idea that we're commenting! some people (especially me!) can't quickly fully understand the long winded posts on websites/tv news etc, so we come here for a look around and sometimes get even more confused? CAG has always been a place to post your worries and fears and after a big announcement like this its' understandable thet'll be quite a bit of confusion etc:) ...is anybody elses head hurting???

[Bookworm]

In light of these recent develpoments, does this mean that my case and the 17 others will be stayed untill the test case is resolved? Or will mny case ever get to court, because i have little hope right now.

 

Boris, I just answered you on your Mercantile thread. ;-)