Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[Mrs Goggins]

Thanks for your advice! I do hope you're right. I'll wait to hear from Cobbetts or the Court by 9th August and will inform everyone of the result. This 'waiver' thing has really got to me.

[Lunatic Flea]

Why on earth would you want to settle for less - if they have failed to follow court orders you will almost certainly win anyway.

Sorry but i just have a gut feeling i am going to get shafted:mad:

My case was in front of the judge yesterday at Grantham court who only look at abnk charges cases on a Monday. As of yesterday the court manager told me that the banks had not contacted them requesting a stay on any cases. However when i called back at 5pm she said the judge did not have time to deal with any bank charges cases and all were being transferred to Lincoln crown court to be looked at this Friday when they will be dealt with. She then said that they received an email at 4:30pm informing the courts about the OFT announcement on Friday. Do you think it is even worth calling and sticking to the full amount??

[Bookworm]

Lunatic Flea, could you post on your own thread, please? I've just had a look (and merged 3 threads), and you haven't updated there at all, instead posting on here, which isn't where you should be discussing this.

[TideTurner]

Ohhhhh s***t!

I was there at Leeds Mercantile 28th June. The judge said NatWest had until 9th August to get back to me with either a settlement or otherwise, and now the FSA go and do this 'waiver' thing - how bad is the timing!!

 

Bingo it is Mrs Goggins, if it was horse racing, you'd be odds on favourite.

[Lunatic Flea]

Lunatic Flea, could you post on your own thread, please? I've just had a look (and merged 3 threads), and you haven't updated there at all, instead posting on here, which isn't where you should be discussing this.

Hi

My appoligies. Not up to speed on how the forum works. I only replied to a post in this thread which was very close to the same position i am in concerning the same bank.

[Destinyofsouls]

No decision on bank charges before 2008 - Times Online

[tomterm8]

Mr Lemos: Gerard Lemos, Chairman of the Banking Code Standards Board

 

House of Commons - Treasury - Minutes of Evidence

Q372 Chairman: That is a good aspect to bring to your attention because it was this Committee which referred this issue to the OFT and then referred it to the Competition Commission. This is an example of industry coming before us when we asked them about penalty charges and saying, "We don't make any extra money out of this"; and we asked, "How much do you make out of it?" and they unanimously decide not to give us that information. As a result we referred it to the OFT and we now see the result of that. It is just an example, Mr Fortescue, for you in your role to say to the banks, "Look you should be thinking in a forward way in this issue so that we do not need to go through these laborious routes", because at the end of the day we find ourselves in this position. Related to Angela's question about the review in 2008, if they were seen to be taking this offensive approach then things would be a lot easier and there would be no need to get into this situation.

 

Mr Lemos: Could I say one more thing in relation to your last question. There is a provision in the Code relating to customers in financial difficulties already, which says that they should be left with enough funds for their basic requirements

 

Q373 Mr Newmark: I understand that. I think the point Mr Fortescue was making hits the nail on the head—it is those, where for some reason for example, a cold winter and their fuel charge is suddenly a lot larger, who slightly go over and they are hit with a £38 or £26 charge. We are really focussing on the people who are on the lowest rung of society. That is really where our concern lies. For those people the £26 or £38 is a meaningful amount to them. That is where our concern lies. For those who just have two bank accounts there is this issue of off-set. I know that consumer groups have expressed concern that banks are beginning to offset one account for another, so if one goes overdrawn they effectively log onto another account to pay off debts. The problem arises sometimes even when a repayment plan has been agreed with the help of an impartial debt adviser. Would such action breach the Banking Code's requirement to treat customers in financial difficulty positively and sympathetically?

 

 

Just in case anyone wanted to use it as evidence to help remove a stay:)

[TideTurner]

Mr Lemos: Gerard Lemos, Chairman of the Banking Code Standards Board

 

House of Commons - Treasury - Minutes of Evidence

 

 

Just in case anyone wanted to use it as evidence to help remove a stay:)

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/36790-bank-taking-your-benefits.html

 

This applies particularly to this thread, where those in need have had their benefits taken away before they even saw them, and were left with nothing, all in the name of profit.

 

Also the low earners have been hardest hit, working all month to have a quarter of your wages taken in charges.

 

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Miscellaneous

Certain benefit to be inalienable **

 

187- Subject to the provisions of this Act, every assignment of, or charge on-

(a)benefit as defined in section 122 of the Contributions and Benefits Act;

(b)any income-related benefit; or

©child benefit,

and every agreement to assign or charge such benefit shall be void; and, on the bancrupcy of the beneficiary, such benefit shall not pass to any trustee or other person acting on behalf of his creditors

 

Why have the banks not been ordered to return these blatantly unlawful charges?

 

Tide

[un1boy]

Mr Lemos: Gerard Lemos, Chairman of the Banking Code Standards Board

 

House of Commons - Treasury - Minutes of Evidence

 

 

Just in case anyone wanted to use it as evidence to help remove a stay:)

 

Can you explain how this can help?

[tomterm8]

One of the arguments used against the stay so far is "The Balance of Convenience". For people on means tested benefits, this is a particularly strong argument, if backed up with reasonable evidence: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/17065-application-removal-stay-updated.html

[Michael Browne]

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Miscellaneous

Certain benefit to be inalienable :

 

Attendance allowance

Benefits for widows and widowers

Child Benefit

Child's special allowance

Community charge benefits

Disability living allowance

Disability working allowance

Family credit

Graduated retirement benefit

Guardian's allowance

Housing benefit

Income support

Invalidity benefits

Invalid care allowance

Maternity

Retirement pensions (Categories A and B)

Sickness benefit

Severe disablement allowance

Unemployment benefit

[tomterm8]

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Miscellaneous

Certain benefit to be inalienable :

 

.....

 

Unemployment benefit

 

That's interesting. I thought it was only means tested (i.e. income based) job seekers allowance, not unemployment benefit.

[maybelline]

is family credit, WFTC or WTC?

[tomterm8]

is family credit, WFTC or WTC?

 

All the tax credits are, under seperate legislation.

[so*fed*up]

All the tax credits are, under seperate legislation.

 

Hi Tomterm,

 

Would I have to qoute this seperate legislation in my POC to the court? I plan to be using the POC that has been kindly given in my thread on this page. I am in receipt of WTC, CTC & CHild Benefit.

[tomterm8]

Tax Credits Act 2002 (c. 21) Main body Part 1 Tax credits Supplementary

Version 1 of 1

section .45

Inalienability

(1) Every assignment of or charge on a tax credit, and every agreement to assign or charge a tax credit, is void; and, on the bankruptcy of a person entitled to a tax credit, the entitlement to the tax credit does not pass to any trustee or other person acting on behalf of his creditors.

 

(2)In the application of subsection (1) to Scotland—

(a)the reference to assignment is to assignation ( “assign” being construed accordingly), and

 

(b)the reference to the bankruptcy of a person is to the sequestration of his estate or the appointment on his estate of a judicial factor under section 41 of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 (c. 46).

[shywazz]

Wow wow wow long long long thread its taken me just over 3 hrs to reach the last page, and i have the lady screaming at me to finish painting the bathroom at the same time, great thread and some good quotes, have my own thread about charges, so wont mention them on this thread, just a reply to say the information on this thread is usefull and will be appricated by many i'm sure. Good luck every1 and like me i really hope you do continue claiming that has been wrongly taken from you.

[andrew1]

Awwww.... thank you

 

 

Actually, rather than wasting a post... Tomterm, are you really saying that if I am on Working Tax credits and these buggers have taken charges out of my account I can just ask them for them back?

[tomterm8]

Awwww.... thank you

 

 

Actually, rather than wasting a post... Tomterm, are you really saying that if I am on Working Tax credits and these buggers have taken charges out of my account I can just ask them for them back?

 

Yes.

 

Unfortunatly, charges can be placed on the rest of your income, however, and so they may simply argue this was what they were doing.

[andrew1]

Awwww.... thank you

 

 

Actually, rather than wasting a post... Tomterm, are you really saying that if I am on Working Tax credits and these buggers have taken charges out of my account I can just ask them for them back?

 

Now, just had a very interesting conversation with a lady in Abbey regarding TAX credits and charges.

 

According to her, Working Tax Credits have no influence over the T & C's I signed on my account ( I did? ) Charges, no matter what gets paid into my account come out regardless.

 

On my bank account at least the only monies in over the charges period of my account have been WTC, any other income has come into other accounts so as far as ABBEY are concerned they have taken charges out of WT Credits. They are saying " go check it out with a lawyer or the Tax office " they are right ! I quoted the section 45 of the Tax Credits Act 2002, she says their T & C's are what I am legally tied to - oh yeah? She also tried to fob me off with the OFT test case until I put her right. What are these people trained to do?

 

Anyone any thoughts on this?

[tomterm8]

Complaint to DWP, it's illegal, and they should be told the errors of their ways:)

[noomill060]

Ah- the old "you signed our T&Cs so we can do what we like" routine.

 

Start a small claim and give them the opportuntity to explain their logic to a judge.

 

(Of course this would take a while, in the meantime, as TT says make a complaint to DWP as well.)

[noomill060]

Jayzuz- they really do like skating on thin ice!

[JonCris]

Andrew1 Like many such employees of the banks the 'lady' you spoke to was talking complete & utter nonsense.

 

Start you action now!

 

Any stay will not apply to your claim for the return of your benefits as your not claiming they are unlawful but that they where taken unlawfully, contrary to law

 

In otherwords reclaim the amount of benefits taken & not the amount of charges (which may or may not amount to the same thing)

 

Benefits which incidental don't belong to you, the recipient, but belong to the state for the upkeep of you, the recipient. This will include any of your Dependants for whom benefits may be received.

[setmefree]

Below is Halifax PLC lastest remarks added to customers bank statements:mad:

 

As part of our commitment to the environment and to cut identity fraud, we are reducing the number of paper

statements we send. From 1st August 2007 accounts credited with an average of less than £500 per month

will receive a paper statement every three months. Accounts with no transactions in the last 6 months

will receive one paper statement per year. If you need a monthly statement, you can receive this online.

 

now if that aint a pop at the poorer people i dont know what is