Office Of Fair Trading Test Case

[Destinyofsouls]

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

 

And to force the banks to process claims pending the outcome.

 

I presonally have got around £15K in court with Abbey & Barclies, now I have to wait 2 bloody years to ge tthat back. That's if the ruling goes against the banks, and I think there are now a lot of people now coming to terms that this just may not happen

[Destinyofsouls]

Just a thought but has anyone thought to start a petition on the No 10 website to claim that the FSA decision to waiver complaints but still allow the banks to continue to charge is fundamentally against consumer interests or similar, hey if I was a lawyer I would have alot more money and less charges ;-/

 

Is there nothing in th Human rights can prevent them doing this?

[tomterm8]

And to force the banks to process claims pending the outcome.

 

I presonally have got around £15K in court with Abbey & Barclies, now I have to wait 2 bloody years to ge tthat back. That's if the ruling goes against the banks, and I think there are now a lot of people now coming to terms that this just may not happen

 

No court would order that:x

 

Ach, life sucks:)

[Josie8]

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

 

 

Think thats a very good idea - obviously the establishment aren't going to look after the interests of the consumer here - this is all about big business and ensuring their fat cat multi million pund bonus keep coming in.................. and we are all just supposed to take it:x

[einyuk]

since the banks are applying to the master of the rolls to have all court cases pending stayed is that automatically accepted or could the master of the rolls turn them down?????

[jubaxt]

it would be interesting to see how many court cases today conclude.maybe there should be a general thread for feedback

[jools36]

Hello

 

I have just spoken to Bristol County Court regarding my case which is due in court on 21 sept 2007.

They have confirmed to me that the case will continue as normal and they have not received any other directions

 

 

 

Julian

[einyuk]

i think only because the application from the bank as not been submitted yet

[Fred_Funk]

CI has already been decided at precedent setting level last month. Anyone who has managed to get it after that was just very lucky that the judge or the defence were not aware of it.

 

That was CI on the basis of mutuality and reciprocity. There remain other grounds on which it may yet be claimable - ie unjust enrichment as quoted in the Sempra case - though I appreciate this would be far from straight forward.

 

Take a look at this thread, especially the last three or four pages...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/97691-contractual-interest-precedent-lost-17.html

... be that as it may, this is not the place for an argument about the merits, or otherwise, of asking for CI. Let's, for the sake of argument, assume that there is a case for it. In those circumstances, what effect might this test case have on anyone who was asking for it?!

 

Fred_Funk

[Lunatic Flea]

This is a quote from the BBC news website relating to the announcment"

However, the banks will still need to make a note of any claims lodged, and will have to honour offers to settle that were made before the test case and FSA waiver were announced"

Surely like in my case when Lloyds have filed to file and serve a counter schedule which was ordered by the Judge they cannot ask for a stay as although the judgement is not due to be heard on Monday they have not complied with a Judges orders so should win by default. I know it would be different if you were going through the court process and both claiment and defendant are up to date withthe info they have been ordered to supply.

[maggiemay48]

Here's the BBA's reaction:

 

 

 

 

Banks join OFT in test case to establish legal clarity on overdraft fees

 

26/07/2007

 

 

Tomorrow morning a number of banks and financial services organisations(1) are taking the initiative, working jointly with the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and the Financial Services Authority (FSA), to ask the UK courts to clarify the legal position regarding bank overdraft fees.

Court process

 

Banks believe the fees customers pay for unarranged overdrafts are fair and clear. However, this is clearly an issue where customers, as well as the banks, would welcome legal clarity. This is why banks have joined with the OFT to approach the courts for a ruling on this issue. It is unclear how long the case will last as that will depend on the court process.

Working together

 

The banks have approached the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) to agree a way forward to handle existing customer complaints. The FSA has agreed to issue a waiver(2), with immediate effect, to suspend the handling of customer complaints on this issue pending a decision by the court. Other banks who are not party to the court action will be applying to the FSA for a waiver and as such will be bound by the outcome of the court case.

What this means for the customer

 

The FSA has agreed that all existing or subsequent customer claims for refunds of bank charges will be recorded by the customer's bank or building society but any decision about potential refunds will be put on hold until the outcome of the court case. Offers which have already been made to customers will be honoured if the customer chooses to accept.

Banks will be writing to the UK courts requesting a stay(3) of all claims pending the outcome of this test case. The banks will be writing to customers with outstanding complaints advising them personally of their position.

Angela Knight, chief executive of the British Bankers' Association (BBA), said:

"Establishing legal clarity on the issue of bank charges is of paramount importance, not only for the banking industry, but for all customers now and in the future."

"The banks have always been firmly of the view that the fees they charge customers are fair and clear. The court case will clarify these points and provide certainty for customers and banks alike."

 

 

 

For further information, please contact:

Press Office (020 7216 8970 )

Out of hours contact (020 7216 8888 )

 

 

Notes to Editors:

(1)The BBA's members involved in the legal action are: Abbey; Barclays; Clydesdale; HSBC; HBOS; Lloyds TSB; Royal Bank of Scotland/NatWest; and Yorkshire banks; and Nationwide Building Society.

(2) The FSA this morning issued a press release announcing the details of this waiver. This can be downloaded from the FSA website (see link below).

(3) Banks will apply for a Stay of Proceedings on all current and pending cases to the Master of the Rolls for England and Wales, to the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland and to the Sheriff Courts in Scotland.

 

Related Links

 

FSA website (External Link)

OFT website - questions & answers (External Link)

Are these ok for printing off for court?

[Lunatic Flea]

Are these ok for printing off for court?

Do we think The banks will post a request to courts or could they do it via fax? I only ask as i was due to receive judgement this Monday after Lloyds failed to serve to me and file at court a counter schedule by Monday just gone. Hopefully being the weekend the court would not have received any request from the bank before my District Judge looks at my request

[LyncusBee]

The media reporters should let people know that The OFT has in affect let the banks carry on with their regime of charges and delayed (at best) any consumer recourse .

 

This is just another nail in the coffin of this country's regulatory framework , just as Energy Suppliers running a muck with peoples accounts and Comms companies arguing over TV channels, competition can be seen as healthy to the consumer but in England it is becoming clear who the consumer watchdogs are in the laps of, lets face it it starts with the attitude of the Chancellor of this, oh no wait a minute, Prime Minister!, of this country.

[LyncusBee]

Do we think The banks will post a request to courts or could they do it via fax? I only ask as i was due to receive judgement this Monday after Lloyds failed to serve to me and file at court a counter schedule by Monday just gone. Hopefully being the weekend the court would not have received any request from the bank before my District Judge looks at my request

 

I would suspect, but I am no expert, that they use a closed courier system same as Solicitors etc I hope you get the judgement you want though.

[Destinyofsouls]

Just spoke to the guy at my court. He has heard nothing yet and says the claims go on as normal. However, I suppose it is early days yet.

 

he seemed to think that a decision is going to be made today.

And we get advice from these people?

[Destinyofsouls]

Hello

 

I have just spoken to Bristol County Court regarding my case which is due in court on 21 sept 2007.

They have confirmed to me that the case will continue as normal and they have not received any other directions

 

 

 

Julian

Early days yet, you watch and see

[jubaxt]

spoke with my local court-not allowed to advise but obviously once you pay the fee your in the system-no going back so no refund.aaaaaaaaaagggghhhh

[everyman06]

just spoke to Brighton County Court and Barclays filed their defence today.The woman said now it's the allocation questionaire and a stay would be up to the judge... grrrrrrrrr

 

Seems like all we can do is keep on fighting and pray the money-god has mercy on our broke souls...

[Lunatic Flea]

I would suspect, but I am no expert, that they use a closed courier system same as Solicitors etc I hope you get the judgement you want though.

Well at least the Court is closed over the weekend and i will keep my fingers crossed my matter is dealt with by the judge before the court receives any requests:mad:

[einyuk]

if the banks decide each case on its own merits as they always say then surely they can't on mass apply for all court cases in the system to be stayed at once.......can't there be a legal challange on this point?........they should apply for a stay on each case at a time??

[Lunatic Flea]

if the banks decide each case on its own merits as they always say then surely they can't on mass apply for all court cases in the system to be stayed at once.......can't there be a legal challange on this point?........they should apply for a stay on each case at a time??

Good point. Every claiment is not at the same point. If it is true that Banks are going to honour promises they made to settle out of court i can't see how in my case they can ask for a stay when they have failed to comply with the "Orders" a judge gave and i have requested judgement. I hope it is on individual cases ask i stand a better chance

[Destinyofsouls]

No court would order that:x

 

Ach, life sucks:)

Why would it need a court to rule?

 

The FSA didn't need one. This would be pressure for the FSA to do a u turn on the waiver of processing charges, not a law

[Destinyofsouls]

Surely this is a breach of human rights anyway. It is our legal right to challenge people in a court of law WHATEVER CASE IS GOING THROUGH, and this is a breach of that fundamental right.

[Mister Twister]

Unfortunately cases are stayed pending high court decisions sometimes for years and there is nothing we can do about it.

 

A recent example is where people sleeping in their cars under the influence of alcohol who were up for drink driving went to a test case and all cases were stayed for 2 years!

[sossij]

it seems to me that the Consumer Action Group should consider applying for an injunction to prevent the banks applying these charges while the matter is in court.

 

Agreed. Can this be done?