Which courts are carrying on????

[Bookworm]

still depends on the master of the rolls i would think.................if he tells all courts to suspend all claims surley the courts would have to abide?

 

I thought a Master of the Rolls was my local baker?

 

Seriously, though, what does that have to do with him? He presides over the Court of Appeal in the House of Lords and is responsible for the records or 'rolls' of the Chancery Court, and also registers new solicitors, so why should that come under his jurisdiction? (I know nothing about him, so don't be afraid to explain!)

[einyuk]

basically in the brief from the banks they were to apply to the master of the rolls to have all court cases pending suspended till the outcome of the test case.

 

a snipit of the announcement taken from the MoneySaving.COM site

 

 

In a surprise announcement the Office of Fair Trading has announced it has agreed to a test case with seven major banks to decide the principles of reclaiming in the High Court. At the same time the regulator the FSA has said banks no longer need deal with complaints; the Ombudsmen is likely to suspend dealing with them too, and a request will go to the Master of the Rolls that all courts suspend current cases until we’ve had a test case. See the detailed Channel 4 news video of the piece (in which I was interviewed just after the news broke)

[ICY]

the problem is bits of information are being taken from here and there, but where are the proper official announcements, different news channels ect are saying different things, who on earth are we supposed to listen to, there seems to be much scarmongering going on at the mo, whats true and whats not, i was first alarmed on hearing the news on bbcgmr radio but after looking into it more i dont think its as bad as people are being told

[deadlykiss]

so im thinking until master of the rolls says something the courts can carry on

with cases

[ICY]

Some of the courts have already declared that they will be continuing as normal with these claims

[Ladidi]

The courts can carry on with the cases and they can decide, from the way I am reading on here. But, however, if they rule in the consumers favour in light of everything all said and done I wouldn't be surprised if the banks who are signed up for this then put in a appeal and then get onto the "Master of Rolls" and ask him/her to send out a message to say all court cases pending bank charges are to be suspended until further notice or the outcome of the "Test Case" they have all agreed and signed up to.

 

Thats my opinion, anyway.

 

Ladidi

[determindator]

Does anyone have any info on Watford CC?

 

I am thinking of contacting Bank Fodder who is compiling info for TV. I worked for a Bank one stint for ten years then another ten years after a break. Banks can set up auto transfers to transfer money from one acc to the other ie savings to current say if a dd or cq was presented. The transaction occurs instantaniously so you can keep money on savings and only transfers when a payment hits the current acc. This prevents charges and you don't have to bother at checking your current acc. This arrangement was not encouraged after a while I would say sometime in the eighties early nineties maybe. I believe it was eventually phased out altogether. This means one thing. The banks realised they were missing out on charges and were assisting the customer too much. To me it is deliberate and goes against all morals.

 

Determind

[ICY]

that is really interesting to hear, the truth always comes out eventually lol

[Ladidi]

I agree the truth always comes out eventually, but as we all know, the banks will look after themselves and say to hell with consumer. They not happy at what they already paid out, they are not gonna pay out more than they have to and lets face it, with them it will very little if anything at all. Banks are here to TAKE YOUR MONEY, NOT give it BACK!

 

Ladidi

[srfrench]

Stop!

 

One thing springs out and hits me for six!

 

Since when did the FSA run the Courts?

 

The FSA has only said to the Banks that they can stop processing claims. If the Court issues Orders or similar, they would be beyond stupidity if they quoted the FSA and ignored the Court!

 

Continue with your claims! Afetr all the hearing may last for nearly 2 years!

[spicester]

 

Continue with your claims! After all the hearing may last for nearly 2 years!

 

Right On!! why are so many people getting jittery? the oft/fos test case is just them NOT the courts lol. mind you my judge is being a pig lol so he probably will stay the case so thats why I am turning the heat up NOT allowing it too cool off!!!

[Ladidi]

I have just read that they are gonna be asking for all court cases currently being worked on to be suspended until the outcome of the test case. This was on a MSN web page for UK.

 

 

Overdraft fees case goes to court

By Simon Ward

July 27 2007

 

Following a lengthy investigation into unauthorised overdraft charges, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has filed a court action that says the charges are unfair.

 

Seven banks – NatWest/Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds TSB, Halifax/Bank of Scotland, Abbey and Clydesdale – and Nationwide building society have agreed to face the High Court.

 

This test case will look to settle, once and for all, whether overdraft charges are a fair reflection of the cost to banks of people going overdrawn without permission.

• Get a better bank account with our comparison tool

Customers winning in court

This follows a series of out-of-court payments by banks and building societies to people who had taken legal action to reclaim their charges.

 

In one day alone last month, 75 cases were heard at Leeds Mercantile Court, with many being won by the people claiming their fees back.

 

Hundreds of thousands of pounds have now been refunded to customers, which probably explains why the banks have decided to go to court.

 

What this means for claims

The banks have got permission from the Financial Services Authority (FSA) to put any existing unsettled claims on hold until this court case is over. This means that if you’re in the process of making a claim you will need to wait for the verdict.

 

However, if you’ve received an offer from a bank or building society you can still accept it. But if you reject it to pursue further action you’ll need to wait for the High Court decision.

 

The Financial Ombudsman Service has announced that it’s suspending any work on overdraft fee cases until the case has been heard. County courts are also expected to stop any court actions.

 

Despite this, Citizens Advice says that people who feel they have been overcharged should continue to make claims, so that they are in the system for when a decision is reached.

 

Of course, if the banks and building societies win, then it is unlikely that anyone will be able to claim their overdraft fees back.

 

If the banks lose, then experts say it could mean the end of free banking in the UK as banks look to get back some of the money they will be paying out to customers. The final bill could run into billions of pounds.

• How to claim your charges back

How long will the case take?

Estimates on how long the case will take vary. Research company Defaqto predicts that it will last for years. Many consumer groups are calling for a speedy outcome.

 

But with so much at stake, it’s not likely to be quick.

[sallysas]

'Never let the truth get in the way of a good story' is a maxim that applies here. As already stated there would be so many cases backed up the effect on courts would be horrific. Things are fine here in Brum as I filed yesterday. Can't believe people are so worried.

 

I feel sorry for those using Martin Lewis's website as he recommends not using the court and going to the FOS.

[Ladidi]

It dont matter which route you take, word is that all courts are going to be told to suspend all actions on bank charges until the outcome of the test case, which is rumoured to take any where from 1 year to 2. Who knows, the only winners are the Lawyers doing this they will be getting paid top whack to defend and find what ever means they can to prevent the banks having to pay out more than they have to - which means they would prefer to pay nothing at all and just lose what they have already lost out on.

[chrisking1962]

Am I reading this wrong but is'nt it OVERDRAFT CHARGES? with the test case or is it ALL CHARGES?

 

If it is only overdraft charges, why not omit them from your claim for now and go for the other charges as normal?

 

regards

chris

[ICY]

FFS when are reporters going to actually give a TRUE reflect of what is happening.

 

 

All bank cases have not been suspended. What has been suspended is the requirement of the banks to go through the same old rigmarole of their complaints procedures if the complaint is about charges.

 

The OFT have no legal right to force courts to stay claims - although, this doesn't mean that the courts themselves won't stay the claims pending the outcome of the OFT's test case.

 

I wish all this hysteria would stop, people are going on as if the end of the world has arrived, at this stage THIS ACTION MEANS NOTHING and we should carry on as normal, all this panicking needs to stop there is absolutley no need for panic.

Since when did we ever believe the press in this country anyway, we all now they have always been full of inaccuracies and this is no different.

 

If you were going to put a claim in, then put it in, if you are allready in the courts system, then carry on, IF any judge decides to allow a stay pending then we need to work together and we will come up with valid legal arguements to appeal, ALL IS NOT LOST

 

Remember people UNA NOS ES VALIDUS - Together we are strong

[einyuk]

well said mr icy

[deadlykiss]

morning all

well said icy i totally agree ,, think people need to calm down until they hear otherwise from there courts ect,,, business as usual as they say

[Camdenite]

Hear, Hear, ICY. The wording of some of the articles written have been a gross misrepresentation of the facts. As is always the case with these kind of stories in the press, it's the headline that counts. I would expect to see more sober comment appearing in one or two of the Sunday papers financial sections tomorrow once actual Financial ournalists appraise the effect rather than sub-editors.

[Ladidi]

I hear what you saying ICY and I agree, but I cant help but not get optimistic, lets face it, the banks adn thei supposed lawyers have already dragged things out I wouldn't be surprised if they said hey all pending cases should not be resolved until the outcome of this "test case"

 

Granted, carry on as you would file your claims do what the courts ask, I intend to do just that, I`m just not confident that any kind of outcome will be different to what we have already been given as from yesterday. Only thing that would sway me is when we hear of someone already in the courts system and judge awarding the case to the claimant.

 

After all the highs and lows since starting this, I`m not gonna raise my hopes on this no more - Motto now gonna be what will be will be - If it meant to happen it will - If it was meant to be yours it will be returned, if it's not then it wont be!

 

Ok, I done my rant and my groans, gonna go have a cuppa and some toast! Yummy

 

Ladidi

[ICY]

Only thing that would sway me is when we hear of someone already in the courts system and judge awarding the case to the claimant.

 

That should be me next week, when abbey fail to comply with the court order and HSBC who failed to file AQ

[Ladidi]

I hope you win ICY, truly

 

When you find out let me know and then I`ll be singing Lol

 

Ladidi

[ICY]

Oh dont worry everyone will know hehehehe

[Camdenite]

Just seen a thread from un1boy on the General board. Sorry but not sure how to post a link.

 

It's very encouraging regarding Human Rights issues and claim.

[ICY]

THIS ONE Camdenite ?