Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[TideTurner]

At the risk of repeating myself, one party cannot request a stay on claims whilst continuing to make charges on which those claims are based.

 

The banks want to request a stay, but don't want to cease to charge. The banks cannot be particular as to who they decide to stop charging.

 

Else the position they can continue to charge, but nobody can challenge them until a later date.

 

On another point, shares in the majority of those represented today have been on a slippery downward slope, in particular the Halifax.

 

What has been recovered so far is a miniscule amount as to what should be repaid.

 

Tide

[toffo9]

ive just sent an email to the oft complaining about the suspension of bank charges. if everybody does it maybe they will know how ****ed people are.

[Guest Wild Billy]

ive just sent an email to the oft complaining about the suspension of bank charges. if everybody does it maybe they will know how ****ed people are.

 

[kog]

I was thinking just the same thing - do you have an email address

[toffo9]

just google oft its in there... wild billy your a tool.

[Guest Wild Billy]

just google oft its in there... wild billy your a tool.

 

Yes, but at least I'd be e-mailing the regulator responsible for introducing the waiver.

[bery]

I really don't understand this. The law needs to be clarified and that will now happen. That's a good thing isn't it? There have certainly been plenty of posts calling for a test case in the past so why shy away from that now? Everyone knew it would happen at some point and it should have happened much earlier.

 

What the hell are people scared of? Everyone is confident the Regulations apply and the charges are unfair so the law will prevail. Or aren't you so confident and you're now worried this will upset the applecart? This issue is bigger than anyone on this site and this case stands to benefit everyone in the UK, not just the thousands on this site.

 

The alternative is that the test case is never taken and the law is never calrified. Is that what we want? I don't. The OFT may be a lot of things but to suggest a Government department is in cahoots with the banks is don't. It's just spin. If you're taken in by this then I would say you are pretty stupid.

 

I don't currently have a claim with a bank so maybe I'd be more annoyed if I had. But I'm seeing the bigger picture. We should all be very happy with this, even if it means it will take a bit longer to get the money back.

just stupid. As is the suggestion the banks welcome this. Of course they

[treehuggingcox]

i think we're all compeltely gob smacked at how this waiver has been placed and yet they continue to charge people even though the actual test case can potentionally could benefit us in future banking.most people and i myself are one of them cannot believe that we are now going to be let hanging for anything up to a year to even hear if i may receive some money back. the banks againg gaining money as they are still holding onto all the charges unlawfully taken form everyone.

yeah i know some people may feel like they are saying the same thing over and over maybe even banging your head agains a wall but have some empathy.

[TideTurner]

has anybody been in touch with barclays since the announcement of the oft test case? if so what was their responce?

if they stop all cases for approximately 1 year as the waiver states they can imagine how back logged they really will get.

 

 

Treehugginhox,

 

You'll find that this whole scenario has been thrashed out in numerous meetings, and designed to give the banks breathing space given the current onslaught as they are overwhelmed.

 

This also applies to the Courts.

 

Many of them will use this for publicity - you can't claim because the FSA says so etc.

 

All charges should now cease as they must be considered as being in dispute.

 

Tide

[diabolical]

I don't know if this link has been posted, it shows the legal firms that are acting for the banks:

 

OFT kick-starts bank charge proceedings - 27 July 2007

[bery]

I really don't understand this. The law needs to be clarified and that will now happen. That's a good thing isn't it? There have certainly been plenty of posts calling for a test case in the past so why shy away from that now? Everyone knew it would happen at some point and it should have happened much earlier.

 

What the hell are people scared of? Everyone is confident the Regulations apply and the charges are unfair so the law will prevail. Or aren't you so confident and you're now worried this will upset the applecart? This issue is bigger than anyone on this site and this case stands to benefit everyone in the UK, not just the thousands on this site.

 

The alternative is that the test case is never taken and the law is never calrified. Is that what we want? I don't. The OFT may be a lot of things but to suggest a Government department is in cahoots with the banks is just stupid. As is the suggestion the banks welcome this. Of course they don't. It's just spin. If you're taken in by this then I would say you are pretty stupid.

 

I don't currently have a claim with a bank so maybe I'd be more annoyed if I had. But I'm seeing the bigger picture. We should all be very happy with this, even if it means it will take a bit longer to get the money back.

..........The point being, that many of us have spent months and months battling, spending not just money in court costs, printer ink, paper , stamps,but also precious time and effort, trawling through paper work and websites.......not to mention stress, .....but spurred on by the success stories of others, which seemed to make it worthwhile, but now that has all been flattened...... its not so bad for those just starting out is it?they dont realise what a long road it is ahead but us poor b*ggers are plain and simple pig-sick, so all this talk of "its what weve been waiting for " is im afraid cold comfort. Lets face it , the majority just want our money back , we're not really that bothered about being superheroes raging against the machine.me personally , well i was looking forward to paying off my tax bill!

[Boris303]

I think we should be looking at the bigger picture.

 

If they were found to be unfairly charging customers by the court, and the test case proved to be a precedent for all subsequent claims, then the banks would have to stop charging customers immediately.

 

So how would they then make the money lost through not charging customers unauthorised overdraft fees etc?

 

I believe this is a carefully planned tactic by the banks to give them plenty of time to implement new ways of banking, charging customers in other ways to make up the lost revenue in not charging unauthorised overdraft charges etc.

 

So the outcome of this case really does not matter to them, maybe a slightly better outcome if they win, but regardless of that i believe we will ALL be banking under new terms and conditions with these banks in 2 years time.

 

Banks are smartarses, and i don't believe for one second they are not doing this without having a carefully thought about PLAN B.

 

They never put all their eggs in one basket.

 

 

Just thought i'd repost this to get some of your views.

[TECHSPEC]

I don't know if this link has been posted, it shows the legal firms that are acting for the banks:

 

OFT kick-starts bank charge proceedings - 27 July 2007

 

Surely the banks should b represented buy one firm?

 

And who's representing the OFT. Are they going it alone, to save money :o

[bery]

Just thought i'd repost this to get some of your views.

here here!

[TECHSPEC]

..........The point being, that many of us have spent months and months battling, spending not just money in court costs, printer ink, paper , stamps,but also precious time and effort, trawling through paper work and websites.......not to mention stress, .....but spurred on by the success stories of others, which seemed to make it worthwhile, but now that has all been flattened...... its not so bad for those just starting out is it?they dont realise what a long road it is ahead but us poor b*ggers are plain and simple pig-sick, so all this talk of "its what weve been waiting for " is im afraid cold comfort. Lets face it , the majority just want our money back , we're not really that bothered about being superheroes raging against the machine.me personally , well i was looking forward to paying off my tax bill!

 

I totaly agree. With just a few rare exceptions, we were all getting our money back, and thats what people care about.

 

The OFT may get their day in court, but in the meantime, they have caused continued hardship for thousands of people, and spoilt what was a good thing for the consumer.

 

If they did have to go to court, they should not have given the 'waiver' to the banks, without including a waiver for the consumer not to pay any more charges.

 

This is not sour grapes on my part, as i already have most of my money back. But i really feel for those who were so close to getting theirs back, only for the OFT to do a deal with the devil.

[LyncusBee]

The alternative is that the test case is never taken and the law is never calrified.

 

The alternative was that the banks were brought to a decision by precedent through a funded test case by persons acting upon the true behalf of consumers such as the campaign on this forum and not by a non-ministerial government body or 'Quango' with whom they have possibly, and lets face it since the now Prime Minister is the same ex Chancellor who gave out major fiscal leaniances to the financial services industry, on the grounds that they contribute so much to the country's economy and let the private sectors run a muck with consumer's rights generally.....see my posts in this thread mentioning the clearing system, energy suppliers, pensions etc....

 

Well sure we're a little suspicious.... better to go to court with the devil you 'know' than the those you don't?

 

 

And if you think that's conspiracy theory then look up the definition - " to secretly plan toward a goal" - so when were you, any other consumer, or group thereof, involved in these discussions and decisions; further do you see any forthcoming transparency in the proceedings?

[TideTurner]

It was clear by Mrs smug on the TV this morning, gaining maximum publicity that they had a result.

 

The FSA is funded by the banks (250m+ last year) and the BBA represent the banks, although they have led us to believe they have brought this case with the co-operation of the OFT for the purposes of clarification.

 

I have a big case at Court, any deferrance will simply cost a lot of money in interest. The facts have been analysed.

 

Nobody should be deterred from making a claim, and should not see this as the ultimate obstacle. This is day one. What happens on Monday is a different matter.

 

No doubt the banks will use this, but I can only see this as a way of stalling the current position so mistakes are not made by the powers that be. Tom Brennan is a good example, as are the Hull cases.

 

Relax.

 

Tomorrow's another day with another way.

 

Tide

 

Off to sharpen my teeth

[andrew1]

Am I right in thinking this is only about unauthorised overdraft charges not about returned cheque or Direct Debit charges? I watch that clip/linked about 10 pages back on the channel 4 news item when the banking rep stated it was not about penalty charges just Unauthorised overdraft fees. Haven't seen anyone mention it thereafter.

[TideTurner]

Andrew1

 

Let's get the full 'mull over' on Monday

 

Mine's a mortgage and I am confident this will not apply. One of the main points is this appears to relate mainly or solely to the UTCCR 1999. Anything outside of this can be fought obviously.

 

In any event, an application will have to be made by the other side for a stay, and the grounds presented to the Court.

 

Looks expensive to me.

 

Tide

 

Why have the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the Bill of Rights Act 1689 been overlooked?

[LyncusBee]

I believe this is a carefully planned tactic by the banks to give them plenty of time to implement new ways of banking, charging customers in other ways to make up the lost revenue in not charging unauthorised overdraft charges etc.

 

So the outcome of this case really does not matter to them, maybe a slightly better outcome if they win, but regardless of that i believe we will ALL be banking under new terms and conditions with these banks in 2 years time.

 

I agree totally, I know people don't want to hear negativity but the banks have obviously thought this through way before today, remember the Guardian's column earlier this year stating that --the OFT may soon make a statement regarding reclaimation of charges that will affect people's claims--? Were they on a news thread that then dissapated or was intervened upon? We have fantastically short memories..... Paris who! ...LOL

 

Overall though WE SHOULD KEEP CLAIMING it's the English tendancy of non-complaint that has allowed this whole environment to perpetuate and grow.

 

Oh and next time you receive a sub-standard meal from a restaurant kitchen tell them to take it back to the Chef also....

[elsinore]

Am I right in thinking this is only about unauthorised overdraft charges not about returned cheque or Direct Debit charges? I watch that clip/linked about 10 pages back on the channel 4 news item when the banking rep stated it was not about penalty charges just Unauthorised overdraft fees. Haven't seen anyone mention it thereafter.

 

Tens of thousands of complaints that unauthorised overdraft charges and returned item fees on current accounts are unfair have been received by the county courts and the Financial Ombudsman Service. The banks do not accept that the legal test of unfairness set out in unfair contract terms legislation applies to the charges.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/market-studies/personal2

Els

[MacBoy]

I don't currently have a claim with a bank

 

So what are you doing here Billy - apart from trolling?

[noomill060]

FSA chews Mrs Smugs nuts off- The Times

 

Watchdog accuses banks of lying over charges - Times Online

 

 

I think this could be quite an entertaining few months, after all....

[bery]

quite!

[stonedecroze]

indeed, exciting isn`t it