Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaims

[megansden]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Hi!

They more money than I want to throw at it and lose, I contacted the Banks Obudsman today just to get a feel of how they are dealing with all this, Quite simply there not and are bound by that case not to take on Bank Charges, but if we have been dealt a bad blow through Hardship by thye banks they will then take it up and follow it through, they are in fact going to follow up on that bit of my case not the bank charges, so we shall see what happens

megansden

[EXC]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Thanks Exc.

But that being the case, what's the point in seeking leave to appeal to the court that rendered the judgement when one can just simply over their heads and apply to a higher court anyway ?

AFAIK you can only apply directly to the higher court once leave to appeal has been refused by the lower court. I believe that the criteria used in consideration of the appeal application differs between the lower and higher courts (though the grounds of appeal would be the same) ie the higher court takes into account the wider public interest, and so that may the reason why a lower court refuses and the higher grants it and why you could get 2 bites of the cherry.

[Jester]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

AFAIK you can only apply directly to the higher court once leave to appeal has been refused by the lower court. I believe that the criteria used in consideration of the appeal application differs between the lower and higher courts (though the grounds of appeal would be the same) ie the higher court takes into account the wider public interest, and so that may the reason why a lower court refuses and the higher grants it and why you could get 2 bites of the cherry.

Thanks for answers Exc, I appreciate it. I really do. But I keep getting the feeling that we are overlooking something fundamental here and that is our right to justice, or at the very least to see justice being done.

OK. I may well be being ignorant. But, that being the case, then surely the fact that the Supreme Court overruled TWO prior judgements by lower courts that Bank Charges are illegal, the mere fact that we are not then allowed to appeal that decision to a higher court again (i.e. the ECJ) must surely be a breach of our human rights - an act to which this country is signed up to.....or am I oversimplifying this ?

I thought one of the fundamental rules of the Human Rights Act was a right to justice, or at least to see justice being done. With the legal opinion we have just had which states that there are 'fundamental flaws' in the SC judgement, then I am sure that must constitute grounds for justice not being done ... which is what the ECJ is there for.

[EXC]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

OK. I may well be being ignorant. But, that being the case, then surely the fact that the Supreme Court overruled TWO prior judgements by lower courts that Bank Charges are illegal, the mere fact that we are not then allowed to appeal that decision to a higher court again (i.e. the ECJ) must surely be a breach of our human rights - an act to which this country is signed up to.....or am I oversimplifying this ?

The SC only ever ruled that the charges didn't fall within a particular piece of consumer legislation. I don't know the first thing about human rights and the law but I would imagine that as the test case wasn't brought by any individual or group of individuals or representative of any individuals, the human rights argument for access to justice simply can't apply. But maybe it would have done if the case was bought by consumers themselves.

[kiwicat]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

May I suggest a vote of thanks for all those who have worked so hard at Legal Beagles on this case. It takes a lot of courage and sense to realise when to call a halt. Wishing you every success for the future.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Thanks for answers Exc, I appreciate it. I really do. But I keep getting the feeling that we are overlooking something fundamental here and that is our right to justice, or at the very least to see justice being done.
Justice cannot simply said to have been not done simply because the answer we got did not follow our cause of action. It has to be fair under the law(even if we disagree with its conclusion.
OK. I may well be being ignorant. But, that being the case, then surely the fact that the Supreme Court overruled TWO prior judgements by lower courts that Bank Charges are illegal(they never said they were illegal but they did say that they fell within the remit of the OFT to assess the lawfulness on fairness), the mere fact that we are not then allowed to appeal that decision to a higher court again (i.e. the ECJ) must surely be a breach of our human rights - an act to which this country is signed up to.....or am I oversimplifying this ?
Only the Supreme Court could have referred that case to the ECJ and they chose not to so they coulda, shoulda in our view but didn't.
I thought one of the fundamental rules of the Human Rights Act was a right to justice, or at least to see justice being done. With the legal opinion we have just had which states that there are 'fundamental flaws' in the SC judgement, then I am sure that must constitute grounds for justice not being done ... which is what the ECJ is there for.

I'm not sure if there is any legal precedent for taking the case further now that it was decided not to refer a case to the ECJ(might have a look if any such precedent exists but I'm not aware of one).

[Jester]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Just seems somewhat not right that the OFT 'won the game' 2-1 but that the Banks only goal was considered more valuable than the two already scored by the OFT !!

[PocketTheDifference]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Im in agreement with Jester, I also think my opinion is Frustration!! Arghh

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Banks.com.au - Class Action against Australian Banks Gains Momentum

Oh, well, pity we ain't Down Under

[Chandler99]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

I would like to add my thanks to everyone on the Legal Beagles Team for all the work they did in relation to the unfair bank charges debate and say that I fully understand the pragmatic nature of the decision to withdraw gracefully over this issue.

The full legal opinion provided by Anthony Scrivener QC is a very well presented and well argued document that is also to be welcomed and my personal thanks go to him as well.

Having read the advice carefully, however, and considered the complaints I have against various banks, I have decided to take one case further and apply for a judgment through the 'small claims' process. In doing so, I have questioned my own motives closely. Yes I feel very angry, yes I want revenge... But more than that I want justice. I believe passionately in the British legal system. Like Amethyst I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theories in relation to the Supreme Court judgement. I still have faith that, as a lay member of the public, I can get a fair and impartial hearing in a British Court of Law.

The case I am pursuing is, in fairness, a little different and is solely charges laid on top of charges so we shall see.....

But, once again, many thanks for your help.

[Budgie]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Banks.com.au - Class Action against Australian Banks Gains Momentum

Oh, well, pity we ain't Down Under

Hmmmmmmm,,,,,,, ideas ideas

Read more about the situation in Australia here Your Money was taken UNFAIRLY. Join us as we take the Banks to court to GET IT BACK

Am trying to find the Aussie equivalent of Legal Beagles,,,,, any ideas anyone !!!

[enaid]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Hmmmmmmm,,,,,,, ideas ideas

Read more about the situation in Australia here Your Money was taken UNFAIRLY. Join us as we take the Banks to court to GET IT BACK

Am trying to find the Aussie equivalent of Legal Beagles,,,,, any ideas anyone !!!

http://australianconsumerwatch.blogs...-daylight.html


In the left hand column a piece about bank charges

[Amethyst]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Australia are still on the penalty charge aspect. The action includes Credit card, loans etc late payment fees. I don't know what the equivalent of UTCCR is there. (actually think its JUST come in -

Unfair terms Bill introduced into Federal Parliament - 24 June 2009
The Minister for Competition Policy, Craig Emerson, today introduced the much-anticipated Trade Practices Amendments (Australian Consumer Law) Bill 2009 (Bill) into Federal Parliament.
The Bill will:

• introduce a national unfair contract terms regime applying across all industry sectors (including financial services) but which is limited to consumer contracts;

• introduce new civil penalty provisions for consumer law breaches; and

• add a series of enforcement tools to the ACCC and ASIC’s existing artillery.

The new unfair terms laws are intended to take effect from 1 January 2010. The new enforcement powers and civil remedies will take effect on the day after Royal Assent (which may be prior to 1 January 2010).

so they will have to be careful the class action doesnt fall foul of it. Specifically this

As foreshadowed in the Exposure Draft, the regime will not apply to:

• terms that define the main subject matter of the contract or that are required or expressly permitted by law;

• terms that set the “upfront price” payable under the contract;

Most other countries that have dealt with these charges (outside the EU) have been dealt with by competition enquiries and forced to reduce to proportional fees (eg South Africa) on the basis of the fees being disprop penalties. Ireland was also reduced on that basis, no idea if they are planning any challenge to that now.

Credit cards & loans are still penal here hence it not having gone to court - still. They cant get around that or disguise it as part of the price.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

Yes, Sorry I do know the equivalent.....Compare products and find independent product reviews with Choice.com.au

and

Fair-Fees

The announcement of a massive class action against Australia's big banks for fee gouging reinforces how widespread the problem is., says CHOICE.

Sorry guys but here comes another killer question.


Does the Opinion cover Scottish Law which is separate to Wales, England and Northern Ireland?

[Amethyst]

Re: Important - full Legal Opinion and update on LB's position on bank charge reclaim

UTCCR is the same in Scotland.