Tweet
Bad News: Newspaper thinks Banks Win OFT test case
House of Lords Backs Banks in New Charges Case
By Peter Wakeford
Published on 2 Apr 2009
RSS Feed
Compare Current Accounts...All Current AccountsInterest Free OverdraftsOverdraft Current AccountsPackaged Current Accounts
Hopes of a quick resolution for bank charges claimants have been dashed by the latest events.
Customers trying to reclaim overdraft charges from their banks via the ongoing High Court test case have suffered another legal setback, in a new decision from the House of Lords.
The latest verdict allows banks to dispute a previous decision from the Court of Appeal - which ruled that the financial firms were subject to contract fairness laws. This adds a new twist to the torturous legal history of the High Court case looking into the charges, which was called in 2007 to decide on whether or not they were unfair to customers.
All individual cases of customers reclaiming these fees - which came to around £30 each and were levied by banks for offences including exceeding overdraft limits - were frozen by the Financial Services Authority when the test case began in 2007. Customers have been warned not to expect any refunds for months, with banks showing little sign of giving up the fight against paying the charges back.
Consumer groups expressed dismay at the latest verdict. Doug Taylor, personal finance campaigns manager at Which?, said: "It's outrageous that public money is being used to drag this saga out for even longer when the banks should accept the Court of Appeal's decision and draw a line under this issue once and for all. Not only are the banks prolonging the misery for their customers, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet, they are doing further damage to their already battered public image."
James Caldwell at Fairinvestment.co.uk added: "This latest news is just another delaying tactic by the banks, the test case has been going on for long enough now."
Campaigners hope that the High Court case will eventually agree to let the Office of Fair Trading decide on the charges' fairness. The organisation is anticipated to rule that the fees are unfair, which in turn could lead to banks beginning the refunds.
By Peter Wakeford
Published on 2 Apr 2009
RSS FeedCompare Current Accounts...All Current AccountsInterest Free OverdraftsOverdraft Current AccountsPackaged Current Accounts
Hopes of a quick resolution for bank charges claimants have been dashed by the latest events.
Customers trying to reclaim overdraft charges from their banks via the ongoing High Court test case have suffered another legal setback, in a new decision from the House of Lords.
The latest verdict allows banks to dispute a previous decision from the Court of Appeal - which ruled that the financial firms were subject to contract fairness laws. This adds a new twist to the torturous legal history of the High Court case looking into the charges, which was called in 2007 to decide on whether or not they were unfair to customers.
All individual cases of customers reclaiming these fees - which came to around £30 each and were levied by banks for offences including exceeding overdraft limits - were frozen by the Financial Services Authority when the test case began in 2007. Customers have been warned not to expect any refunds for months, with banks showing little sign of giving up the fight against paying the charges back.
Consumer groups expressed dismay at the latest verdict. Doug Taylor, personal finance campaigns manager at Which?, said: "It's outrageous that public money is being used to drag this saga out for even longer when the banks should accept the Court of Appeal's decision and draw a line under this issue once and for all. Not only are the banks prolonging the misery for their customers, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet, they are doing further damage to their already battered public image."
James Caldwell at Fairinvestment.co.uk added: "This latest news is just another delaying tactic by the banks, the test case has been going on for long enough now."
Campaigners hope that the High Court case will eventually agree to let the Office of Fair Trading decide on the charges' fairness. The organisation is anticipated to rule that the fees are unfair, which in turn could lead to banks beginning the refunds.
Comment