Tweet
Bank Charges Customers May Face Prison
December 15, 2009 - Press Dispensary - While the OFT considers whether to restart its litigation against unfair bank charges, the plight of some customers seeking repayment of bank charges is growing considerably worse.
The recent shock decision by the Supreme Court that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) could not investigate the fairness of bank charges under one of the regulations has stalled consumer efforts to regain their money, as banks have interpreted the ruling to mean that the fight is over, even though consumer groups – including Penaltycharges.co.uk and MoneysavingExpert.com – have identified other regulations – not covered by the Supreme Court ruling – under which the bank charges should remain repayable.
One member of Penaltycharges.co.uk, Mr M – a 36 year old father of two from Essex – has a claim against the Royal Bank of Scotland which was stayed, pending the outcome of the recent High Court test case.
Mr M has been out of work for two years with a consequent rising number of debts, and he and his wife have a claim for just over £3,000 in bank charges lodged with the bank. The amount would largely settle their debts and enable them to rebuild their lives. Meanwhile, however, they struggle to feed their children and heat their flat. With mounting Council Tax arrears of £1,500, Mr M faces the possibility of imprisonment in the coming months, should the council pursue his arrears.
Despite the clear hardship suffered by the family, the Royal Bank of Scotland has now followed the Supreme Court decision with a determination that the couple do not qualify for support under the FSA’s hardship criteria for repayment of penalty charges, delayed by the test case.
Mr M said today:
“My wife & I have a hard time putting food on the table for our kids & I have over £1500 Council Tax arrears. We’re seriously struggling to heat the flat during this cold snap, and meanwhile money that I believe is mine is locked away by a bank that decides of its own accord that I and my family don’t qualify under hardship rules."
As the matter of unfair bank charges drags on and on (with the battle by no means over), an increasing number of victims find themselves with debts they cannot settle, leading to the risk of custodial sentences.
Stephen Hone, Founder of Penaltycharges.co.uk, says:
“Mr M’s case shows just how bad it can get. A bank – largely owned by the taxpayer – is choosing of its own accord to refuse a case of hardship, despite Mr M’s obvious difficulties. If the charges are rightfully Mr M’s, the law should ensure that he is repaid them before it’s too late. We call on the Government to act now: to rein in the bank who’s shares it controls, and to change the law.”
“Currently, the government has its priorities wrong on the banking debacles. While Westminster worries about fat cat bonuses, Mr M and many more could find themselves in debtors’ court and prison.”
Penaltycharges.co.uk appeals – as a matter of extreme urgency – that the OFT, FSA and Parliament should take decisive and rapid action to stop the unlawful business of unfair bank charges and to refund the money taken in the past to its rightful owners.
For people like Mr & Mrs M, government action cannot happen a day too soon.
December 15, 2009 - Press Dispensary - While the OFT considers whether to restart its litigation against unfair bank charges, the plight of some customers seeking repayment of bank charges is growing considerably worse.
The recent shock decision by the Supreme Court that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) could not investigate the fairness of bank charges under one of the regulations has stalled consumer efforts to regain their money, as banks have interpreted the ruling to mean that the fight is over, even though consumer groups – including Penaltycharges.co.uk and MoneysavingExpert.com – have identified other regulations – not covered by the Supreme Court ruling – under which the bank charges should remain repayable.
One member of Penaltycharges.co.uk, Mr M – a 36 year old father of two from Essex – has a claim against the Royal Bank of Scotland which was stayed, pending the outcome of the recent High Court test case.
Mr M has been out of work for two years with a consequent rising number of debts, and he and his wife have a claim for just over £3,000 in bank charges lodged with the bank. The amount would largely settle their debts and enable them to rebuild their lives. Meanwhile, however, they struggle to feed their children and heat their flat. With mounting Council Tax arrears of £1,500, Mr M faces the possibility of imprisonment in the coming months, should the council pursue his arrears.
Despite the clear hardship suffered by the family, the Royal Bank of Scotland has now followed the Supreme Court decision with a determination that the couple do not qualify for support under the FSA’s hardship criteria for repayment of penalty charges, delayed by the test case.
Mr M said today:
“My wife & I have a hard time putting food on the table for our kids & I have over £1500 Council Tax arrears. We’re seriously struggling to heat the flat during this cold snap, and meanwhile money that I believe is mine is locked away by a bank that decides of its own accord that I and my family don’t qualify under hardship rules."
As the matter of unfair bank charges drags on and on (with the battle by no means over), an increasing number of victims find themselves with debts they cannot settle, leading to the risk of custodial sentences.
Stephen Hone, Founder of Penaltycharges.co.uk, says:
“Mr M’s case shows just how bad it can get. A bank – largely owned by the taxpayer – is choosing of its own accord to refuse a case of hardship, despite Mr M’s obvious difficulties. If the charges are rightfully Mr M’s, the law should ensure that he is repaid them before it’s too late. We call on the Government to act now: to rein in the bank who’s shares it controls, and to change the law.”
“Currently, the government has its priorities wrong on the banking debacles. While Westminster worries about fat cat bonuses, Mr M and many more could find themselves in debtors’ court and prison.”
Penaltycharges.co.uk appeals – as a matter of extreme urgency – that the OFT, FSA and Parliament should take decisive and rapid action to stop the unlawful business of unfair bank charges and to refund the money taken in the past to its rightful owners.
For people like Mr & Mrs M, government action cannot happen a day too soon.
Comment