July 7th Hearing

[Amethyst]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

These are pre Nov 2007 - which is when most of the bank changed their T&C's to cloak the fact they are penalties (IMO )

The Judge hasn't had the issues presented to him as yet, and the OFT stated a couple weeks back it was unlikely Judgement on Historic Terms would actually be handed down at this hearing. But we shall see.

[BOBSCOUSE]

Re: July 7th Hearing

Quote of the day from Abbey's QC Ali Malik: ''Just because a charge is exorbitant, does not necessarily make it a penalty''. (!)

:brick:


.............and of course he wouldn't mind being penalised by an exhorbitant charge would he - ARSE. When you lot see him tomorrow, sort him out wudya

:boom::bolt:

[scoobydoo]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

"Quote of the day from Abbey's QC Ali Malik: ''Just because a charge is exorbitant, does not necessarily make it a penalty''. (!)"


What is an exorbitant charge then ? An own goal?

And when, at what point does a charge change from fair to exorbitant?

[Celestine]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

"When is a breach not a breach?"

Ali Malik responded to the OFTs arguments on Abbey Nationals T&Cs by saying that "Breach, means that we accept something has gone wrong with the wording.......but so what?"
This was referring to the inclusion of the word breach in the T&Cs in the same way as in the Nationwide mention of the word breach. The wording is essentially just wording...it doesn't mean there has been an actual breach of contract. Confused yet?!
Yes, Malik was in a flippant mood today!

On to Barclays T&Cs, there was much reference to breaches and administrative charges. Crowe stated that clearly these were disguised penalties as there would be very little administrative activity for such a charge.
Barclays QC was next up, largely mirroring arguments by Malik. He pointed out that the 'breach' element was irrelevant in its wording and intimated that in fact the charge could be a beneficial 'warning flag' to the customer as the bank has recourse to further recovery action to get back its money.

I can't say that Justice Smith seemed that conviced that it was such a wondrous thing however!

It looks as if the scheduling will only permit discussion on the penalty angle and not much else that we know of.

[Curlyben]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

Yeah that makes alot of sense....... NOT.

So much for PIL, even from the QC's

I wonder if the OFT have paid them to say such "stupidities" so the judge has a clear idea exactly what he is dealing with.

I'm amazed by some of the banks' QC comments as they are clearly digging a very large pooh filled hole for themselves. These are people that argue semantics for a living !!!

[scoobydoo]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

Also if they were so confident of the wording of the old t&C why did they all change them? ( against the waiver terms!)

[TANZARELLI]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

LOL its good to see the banks QC's are making it easier for us on this score bless um.

[Ladidi]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

WoooHoo, from reading this little lot sounds like we are winning again slowly but surely... well a girls got to have an excuse to keep her legs crossed for a while lol

On a serious note, would anyone care to give us a clue on where this is likely to be heading. Meaning when will we all get paid out????

God knows i could use the money right now and so could a few thousand others of us considering the credit crunch as it would certainly keep the wolves from our doors...

[scoobydoo]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

long way to go yet I am afraid - but interesting to har the banks arguments , especially when they have had MONTHS to perfect them. lol

[EXC]

Re: ******** July 7th Hearing - LATEST NEWS *********

Other than penalties, absolutely nothing else was even mentioned about the PCA investigation, market study, the next CMC or a declaration on historics & UTCCR.

The OFT's QC (who was very good) was hoping the hearing will just last 2 days. I hope we find out more tomorrow.

[Amethyst]

Re: July 7th Hearing

next bit Legal Beagles

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

I've ordered the transcripts of the 7-9 July hearing/CMC and will post them up when they arrive.

[EXC]

Re: July 7th Hearing

It seems we'll have to wait longer for the judgment on historicals than we thought as Justice Smith is away on an 'extended break' until the 30 September.

At the July hearing a bank QC asked Smithy how long it would be for his judgment would be handed down, to which he replied ''sooner than the last one'' (3 months) but this now looks like it will take longer.

[Budgie]

Re: July 7th Hearing

OH I wonder where he has gone to on his hols, maybe a cruise !!!

I do hope he has left enough money in his current account to cover all his direct debits, we wouldn't want him coming back to any nasty little surprises in the form of bank charges on his account!!!! Or would we ??????

[fuzzybrain]

Re: July 7th Hearing

If he got a taste of what the rest of us are going through perhaps judgement might be made a little sonner and in our favour!!!