Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Office Of Fair Trading Test Case


Guest Wild Billy
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5804 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Has anyone read this?!

 

The Office of Fair Trading: Questions and answers for OFT test case announcement 26 July 2007

 

Point 11 is particularly interesting. Unless I'm reading it wrongly, it says that the OFT and banks have agreed to suspend any claims made to them pending the result of this test case.

 

That's to say, if you write to your bank or the OFT asking for your charges to be refunded, your claim will be put on hold.

 

If, however, you're at the court stage, the OFT press release is quite clear: "It will be for the courts to decide (how to proceed) in relation to claims made to them."

 

That's to say, it isn't necessarily the case that any claims already at the court stage will be suspended - though, I guess, the banks won't hesitate to apply for stays on this basis.

 

What do others reckon?!

 

Fred_Funk

 

In practice, i think that the courts will award a stay on the basis that the issues are being settled in the high court...

 

Sigh. Looks like the english justice system triumphs again:(

 

This is going to go to the House of Lords, so don't expect a result for at least 3 years.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just come across this head line while browsing the net, thought it might intrest site members.

 

Press Assoc. - 15 minutes ago

The Competition watchdog has announced plans to take the major high street banks to court over their unauthorised overdraft charges.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

The Office of Fair Trading will launch a test case in the High Court on Friday in a bid to establish that the high charges are unfair.

Tens of thousands of consumers have complained about the charges, which are levied on people who breach their authorised overdraft limit, with many taking their bank to court.

The OFT, which has been investigating the issue since March, said the banks did not accept the unfairness rules of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations applied to the charges.

But it said in a statement: "The OFT believes that they do and is seeking to establish this legal principle clearly in the court.

"The OFT considers that a quick determination of this point of principle will assist in securing a clear orderly resolution of the fairness of these charges."

It added that it had decided to take action after being unable to secure voluntary compliance.

The test case will involve Abbey National, Barclays, Clydesdale, the HBOS group, which includes Halifax, HSBC, Lloyds TSB, the Royal Bank of Scotland Group, which includes NatWest, and Nationwide Building Society.

Together these banks account for around 90% of the current account market in the UK.

The British Bankers' Association said the banks were working with the OFT and City watchdog the Financial Services Authority to ask the UK courts to clarify the legal position regarding overdraft fees. But it added that the banks still believed the fees for unauthorised overdraft charges were clear and fair.

!2 years Tesco distribution supervisor

7 years Sainsburys Transport Manager

 

4 Years housing officer ( Lettings )

Partner... 23 Years social services depts

 

All advice is given through own opition, also by seeking/searching info on behalf of poster, and own personnel dealings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is going to go to the House of Lords, so don't expect a result for at least 3 years.

 

Assuming that the result is a positive one, and I personally have my doubts, what about those who have claims that are currntly bordering on being Statute Barred?

 

Also, would the banks, assuming that we get the result we want, award interest for the years we have been forced to wait.

GE Money S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued 21/11/06. Responded 01/12/06. Prelim sent 05/12/06 £406. Response 12/12/06- **SETTLED IN FULL** (£396)

HSBC S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued 05/12/06. NO charges in last 6 years.

Lowell CCA issued 21/11/06. Further reminder sent 8/12/06. Now commited criminal offence no response.

Capital One S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 08/12/06 Responded 03/01/07-Prelim Sent 16/01/07. LBA issued 06/02/07- N1 served 07/03/07- acknowledged 14/03/07.

Scotcall CCA issued 16/01/07. Criminal offence committed.

HFC Prelim sent 16/01/07. LBA sent- Final Correspondance issued with time limit of 29/03/07.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the OFT "hopes to have come to a view on fairness by the end of the year.We would then take appropriate steps to enforce our view,including enforcement action if the banks do not voluntarily co operate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Below is link to FOS announcemnt - everyone should read

 

FAQs complaints about bank charges

 

For those without Adobe thingy or too lazy to click on the link, below is text of FOS FAQs

 

 

consumer factsheet on …

1 unauthorised overdraft charges

 

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) is taking a "test case" to the High Court – to get answers to important legal questions about bank charges for unauthorised overdrafts.

The Financial Ombudsman Service and the courts have received very large numbers of complaints from consumers about these charges. We have decided to suspend work on these cases – while we wait to hear the outcome of the High Court "test case".

This factsheet explains what the "test case" means for consumers – who may be at various stages of complaining about these charges.

1. "I haven’t complained yet about unauthorised overdraft charges on my account – am I too late now?"

The High Court "test case" on unauthorised overdraft charges does

 

 

 

not mean that you are now too late to complain. But until the outcome of this important legal action is known, banks are putting complaints about these charges on hold. This means that decisions won’t be made on these complaints for some time.

 

The Financial Services Authority (FSA), the regulator for financial services, has agreed that banks can suspend their work on complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges – while the "test case" is running.

But in return, the FSA has set strict conditions that banks must follow – including requiring them to keep customers who have complained about bank charges up-to-date with developments.

Once the legal proceedings are finished and the law is clarified, banks will have to apply the High Court decision to all the complaints they put on hold over this period.

If you want to register your complaint with your bank at this stage – but don’t know who to complain to – get in touch with us. We’ll contact the right person at the bank for you, telling them you have a complaint that they will need to deal with – once the legal proceedings are finished. Our contact details are at the bottom of this factsheet.

2. "my bank’s still dealing with my complaint about charges. What happens now?"

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has agreed that banks can suspend their work on complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges – while the High Court "test case" is running. Because of the important legal issues that are being decided, this legal action is likely to take some time.

But the FSA has set strict conditions that banks must follow, if they put complaints on hold over this period – including requiring banks to keep customers who have complained about bank charges up-to-date with developments.

Once the law has been clarified by this important "test case", banks will have to apply the High Court decision to all the complaints they have put on hold.

3. "I’m not happy with my bank’s response to my complaint about charges. Can the ombudsman get involved?"

The Financial Ombudsman Service is not able to deal with any new complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges – while we wait for the High Court to answer the important legal questions in this area.

You should let your bank know, if you’re not happy with how it has responded to your complaint about bank charges. Your bank will keep your complaint on hold – until it can deal with it in line with what the High Court decides. This may take some time – but your bank should keep you up-to-date with developments.

After the High Court "test case" – if you remain unhappy with your bank’s response at that stage – you will then be able to refer the complaint to the ombudsman service.

4. "my complaint about bank charges is already with the ombudsman service. What happens now?"

We need to know the outcome of this important High Court case, before we can make decisions on individual complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges.

This means that where we have already started looking at individual complaints, we will not be able to continue work on the cases – until the High Court has answered the key legal questions in this area.

But we will continue to co-ordinate settlements offered by banks – in cases where there is already an offer on the table from the bank that the consumer would like to accept.

And in cases that we put on hold – while we wait for the key legal questions to be answered – we will write to the consumers involved, to keep them up-to-date with developments. We will review these cases in the light of the High Court decision.

In some cases (usually where consumers complained to us before they gave their bank the chance to deal with their complaint) we have referred complaints to the bank involved, for them to put through their own complaints process. In these cases, the bank will put the complaint on hold – until it can deal with the case in line with what the High Court decides. This may take some time – but your bank should keep you up-to-date with developments.

5. "I complained about unauthorised overdraft charges – and my bank has now made me an offer. Should I accept it – or wait and see what happens?"

If your bank has already offered you a settlement to resolve your complaint – and the offer is still open to you – you need to decide whether to:

 

 

 

accept the offer – in which case your complaint will be settled for good. You won’t be able to complain later about the bank charges covered by the settlement – whatever the outcome might be of the High Court "test case" on bank charges. or

 

 

 

 

 

reject the offer. This means that the current offer will no longer be open to you. But your complaint will be reviewed – when the High Court makes its decision on bank charges. No one can say at this stage what this decision will be.

 

If you’re not sure on what basis your bank has made you an offer, you should contact your bank for details.

2

6. "I’ve already accepted an offer from my bank – following my complaint about charges. Is this now the end of the matter?"

If you’ve already accepted an offer from your bank, this means your complaint will almost certainly be settled for good. The case won’t be re-opened. You can’t complain again about the bank charges covered by the settlement – whatever the outcome might be of the High Court "test case" on bank charges.

7. "why is the ombudsman service putting its work on bank charges on hold?"

The law is one of the things that the ombudsman service has to take into account when making decisions on individual cases. As the important High Court "test case" on bank charges is expected to clarify the law, we have decided not to continue our work on complaints about unauthorised overdraft charges – until the outcome of this "test case" is known.

8. "what about complaints that involve other banking-related problems, as well as bank charges?"

It should usually be possible to deal with all the parts of the complaint

 

 

 

except the part that relates specifically to whether bank charges are lawful or not. So it’s likely that only the bank charges issue would be put on hold – while we wait for the High Court to answer the important legal questions in this area.

 

You would be able to accept a settlement for the other parts of the complaint, without affecting your right to have your complaint about bank charges looked at again when the legal proceedings are at an end.

phone

 

 

 

0845 080 1800 (office hours)

 

Financial Ombudsman Service

This factsheet for consumers is only a general guide. It is not legal guidance. We look at each case on its own individual facts and merits. We will always give you the chance to query anything you don't understand or agree with.

© Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd, July 2007

3

 

“It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi i've got a pre hearing tomorrow will i still need to attend? or is my case going to be put on hold

 

You should attend.

 

Assuming that the result is a positive one, and I personally have my doubts, what about those who have claims that are currntly bordering on being Statute Barred?

 

Also, would the banks, assuming that we get the result we want, award interest for the years we have been forced to wait.

 

it's vital to submit the claims, 'cause otherwise they will become statute barred.

 

Interest question = yes.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone,

 

We don't know the full details as we just seem to have only seen some of the program. But what I saw was a very, very, very, ****ed Martin Lewis who had not been informed about this until half an hour before the programme.

Hopefully some of the moderators will soon be able to tell us a little bit more

 

Eileen

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so confused...

 

I have just got my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) details back, and worked out how much they owe me, but have not sent them the next letter yet...

 

Do I now have to wait or should I go ahead and send the LBA?

Fairy Vimto

 

Vs Halifax (partners account) - still awaiting correct paperwork

Vs Lloyds TSB (Personal account) - £500 taken in charges

Vs Lloyds TSB (Joint account) - £1216 taken in charges

 

Correct as at 25th July 07

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 years!!!!

 

Brilliant. Thanks OFT - weren't we all doing quite well without them? How many cases had been lost to the banks? How many had been won?

 

Once again the consumer gets done over - The sad truth is the stakes have just gotten too high - Now the banks can't even contemplate losing - If this case results in them having to automatically pay everyone back then I'll personally eat the 8 thousand pages of statements I've had to wade through.

 

@!*!

 

:-x:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, instead of going through the court route, I would now go the financial ombudsman route...

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, instead of going through the court route, I would now go the financial ombudsman route...

I think my original post got lost due to so many listings at the same time.

I am worried and confused now.

The received the "General Form of Judgement or Order" as detailed below and have provided the information as requested by the Judge. I also provided to SCM full details of each charge and how worked out my interest etc as they requested it in a letter several weeks ago. I spoke to the court manager on the 23/7/07 who said Lloyds have failed to file at court a counter scedule and also they have not served anything on me. I even checked again on Tuesday with the court manager who said they definately not received anything.She told me to write to the judge asking for judgement which will be placed in my file that the file which will be given to the judge to look at next week who will then decide what happens next.She told me that in her experience if the defendant does not enter a counter claim by the deadline the judge will rule in the claiments favour. She also told me that because i their court dispensed with the Allocation questionare the bank will not be entitled to a stay of judgement.

I can almost taste the money but will this news today scupper that or as Lloyds failed to meet the deadline imposed by the Judge and it is so far down the line i can breath a sign of relief?

Surely my claim has gone too far and Lloyds cannot ask for anymore time etc???

Reading what Malaga1 wrote above "But the banks will be granted a waiver so they do not have to answer to any more complaints now" i guess this all might relate to any new claims just starting.

It reads as follows: Before District Judge Smith sitting at Grantham County Court, Harlaxton Road, Grantham Linc's

Upon reading the documents on file IT IS ORDERED THAT

1) The claiment do by 4:00pm on 9th July 2007 file at Court and serve on the defendant a scedule particularising each and every charge complained of together with the interest calculation.

2) The defendant do by 4.00pm 0n 23rd July 2007 file at Court and serve on the claimant a counter scedule in answer.

After compliance the District Judge will consider further.

Because this order has been made by the court without considering representations from the parties, the parties have the right to apply to have the right to apply to have the order set aside, varied or stayed. A party wishing to make an application must send or deliver the application to the court to arrive within 7 days of the date of service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point made earlier is very valid and needs to be put to the OFT

 

The banks should not charge any more OD fees until the result is known

 

It works both ways

  • Haha 1

7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the clarification zootscoot

MBNA **WON** at prelim stage £1518.30 :)

 

Barclays claim for £1800:- S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 08/12/06 / Prelim sent 20/02/07 / LBA sent 08/03/07 / N1 submitted 29/03/07 / AQ Submitted 11/05/07 / Defence struck out 05/06/07 / Judgement Order filed 07/06/07 /Cheque received and cashed 14/06/07 £2692.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...