Martin3030 v Barclays

[Amethyst]

Just a link - don't know how long its been adjourneded for but might be worth keeping an eye on. He didnt get struck out instantly so maybe doing something right.


Martin3030 v Barclays business LIMITATION WON-now for the fun. - Page 6 - The Consumer Forums

[Guest]

Re: Martin3030 v Barclays

"A number of orders have been made to both sides.
I cant disclose details of those at this point."

Bull****

[Amethyst]

Re: Martin3030 v Barclays

pmsl.

I really wish someone would help go through the Foxtons stuff cause theres some good things we can use in there to argue UTCCR applies to business accounts and challenge Barclays and the others on it.

[Guest]

Re: Martin3030 v Barclays

I am not so sure, although I have not read the whole ruling.

I fail to see how the Foxtons judgment can help business claimants, because the UTCCR only applies to consumers and which the court ruled many of Foxtons clients were, since they only owned one or two tenanted properties and were therefore not businesses.

The court made a distinction between these ‘consumer landlords’ and ‘business landlords’ , some of whom operate as a limited or listed company and a National Landlords Association spokesman said "It is unlikely that ‘business landlords’ will be considered ‘consumers’ for the purposes of this ruling and, therefore, may not succeed in claiming back renewal fees."

So, given that these business claimants who are wanting charges back were operating business accounts, why should they be considered to be consumers? The Foxtons case made the distinction because it needed to, I don't see why the courts should make that interpretation for those who operate a business bank account.

That is not to say that business bank charges are fair, but a great deal of the legislation that applies to consumers does not apply to businesses and businesses do not have the same protection as individual consumers. Businesses are assumed to be free to enter into whatever contracts they agree between themselves which means the onus is on the parties to make sure they are happy with the contracts they agree with other businesses.

[Amethyst]

Re: Martin3030 v Barclays

Thank you, is it okay to copy that over to the Foxtons thread ?

[Guest]

Re: Martin3030 v Barclays

Yes of course