Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

[jules2008]

Re: Appeals - Days one, two and three so far

i just love their analogies they are pathetic but great to rip apart at the seams. The one about the purchasing a car and then the garage charging extra for the leather covering is dumb. For one this would be the choice of the consumer and for another as already said the money would not come out of benefits or be taken on a regular basis.
They keep using examples of things you would purchase maybe once or twice every say 5 yrs or so certainly not every month or even over a lifetime of having a bank account.
Plus again we are giving them our money every single week or month and should have more say exactly what happens to the money.

If we could not afford the extra leather covering then we would not presumably be able to have it, but this is an item not a service and is a one off payment. I just dont get it?????

I am glad though that they have said it that the poorest 20% of their customers are allowing the other 80% free banking which is the crux of the problem. Their system is wrong so wrong and they should redress it.
Can anyone tell me what the banking system is for say any european country like France of Germany i bet the people there would not stand for this kind of ripping off.
It makes me sick that British banks which are an institutution cannot admit they are wrong and pay back what they owe to the British tax paying public. It seems to me they dont want to admit to being wrong and so are taking the stance that they are right which in itself is wrong. Not wanting to rant and get on my soap box it is not the only thing that is wrong about this country by a long shot.

the other thing that sickens me beyond belief is they are happy to rip off the poorest people in Britain yet their staff are paid millions in bonus why cant they see that this is what is eating into their precious profit and is being financed by people who keep their system going paying bank charges which are quite frankly legal theft !!!!

[Smasher]

Re: Appeals - Days one, two and three so far

Rabinowitz went on to compare not paying charges if in credit, only if in debit, to using no win no fee services of solicitors, and estate agents.
the Judges agreed and one gave a further example of a builders quote - where they charge to give the quote but you dont necessarily get a new house. So make a charge for a service without the customer having a benefit.

I'm going over old ground here, but in the above examples I still see one fundamental flaw. The customer would have contacted the builder or estate agent and asked for the services they provide and probably be notified of at least a ball park price. This is not the case with unpaid item fees, nobody ever contacted the bank & asked for such a 'service', they were imposed upon people's accounts last year without any opportunity for negotiation either on the price or even whether or not they were wanted at all.
To reverse the analogy, its like a builder turning up at your door and putting his hand straight in your pocket & taking your money, then saying "I've just surveyed your property & it's worth about £50 in today's market".

[EXC]

Re: Appeals - Days one, two and three so far

It's going to be a late start. There was a judgment on another case in court 73 scheduled for 9.30 and has only just started due to some muppets showing up late.

[Budgie]

Re: Appeals - Days one, two and three so far

So I guess you are running the gauntlet of security and having a ciggy in the courtyard then EXC ??

Budgie

[Budgie]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and four so far

A quick update from Exc of Legal Beagles who is attending the appeal hearing again today.


Hearing started late today so not much has been covered so far this morning.

Jonathon Crow for the OFT is still speaking and will continue to do so for much of the day. The Banks will then get an opportunity to respond to Crow in turn.

On the last day of the appeal, possibly Thursday, the Banks will also seek leave to appeal the PIL aspects of the original Judgment.

So far today Jonathon Crow has reiterated some figures from OFT's PCA report, focussing on the fact that in 2006 the Banks generated over 1/3rd of their total income from their charging regimes.

There was also some debate between Crow and Clarke about what constitutes a typical consumer.

Clarke asked : "Can't there be different types?"
Crow responded "A typical consumer is defined by his typicality"

Other than that it is pretty mundane stuff so far this morning.

Hopefully some more news and something to get our teeth into later this afternoon.


Budgie - Legal Beagles



Please note that this post or it's contents may not be reproduced elsewhere without permission having first been sought and obtained from the Author.

[Jester]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

How long do these hearing run every day ?

I am in London on Thursday and might just pop over to have a look-see if my meetings finish early enough. Would be nice to actually put a face to some of the Beagles 'Eavy mob like Budgie and Exc too LOL

[Budgie]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

How long do these hearing run every day ?

I am in London on Thursday and might just pop over to have a look-see if my meetings finish early enough. Would be nice to actually put a face to some of the Beagles 'Eavy mob like Budgie and Exc too LOL

Oi !!!! What do you mean "eavy mob" LOL

The hearing usually run from around 10 AM ish to 4.30PM ish but can change depending on the use of the Court room etc etc.

We will know tomorrow what the schedule is for Thursday so check in here.

Would be great to meet you Jester, I am hoping to be there on Thursday and am sure Exc will be there anyway. You can't keep him away !!

Budgie

[Jester]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

My meetings are scheduled to finish at around 3pm (though they finished much earlier last week) and my train from Paddington to home is not until 7.15pm. So I could quite feasibly make it over there well before the finish time. But I shall keep an eye out for updates. You'd easily recognise me Bud. I'm so devilishly handsome I stand out in any crowd LMAO

Only other question, where the hell are these courts and what is the nearest tube ? lol

[Budgie]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

My meetings are scheduled to finish at around 3pm (though they finished much earlier last week) and my train from Paddington to home is not until 7.15pm. So I could quite feasibly make it over there well before the finish time. But I shall keep an eye out for updates. You'd easily recognise me Bud. I'm so devilishly handsome I stand out in any crowd LMAO

Only other question, where the hell are these courts and what is the nearest tube ? lol

Here you go

Royal Courts Of Justice
Strand
Charing Cross, London, WC2N 5HX

Google Maps

[Sapphire]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

UPDATE FROM COURT: EXC to write this up properly later. Its pretty sketchy as the phone line from EXC wasn't that good and I couldn't really hear him.

Well another exciting day in court, as usual its was very busy in there.

Crow basically finished off this morning by asking is the price that you pay for a bank charge is for a service or not.
Waller: asked would this be for an authorised overdraft.
Crow: replied that only one of the banks made a charge for an authorised overdraft.

Waller: would this be an ancilliary service or does it form part of the contract.
Crow: there is a string of differences between fees for unauthorised and authorised overdrafts
Waller: said would you get an overdraft refusal fee

Justice Lloyd actually laughed at this.

There was a big debate on how they reach a price for exchange of services.

Crow: you don't go to a bank and ask for an unauthorised overdraft and get other banking services thrown in

Big debate on analagies ie BOGOF's (buy one get one free) and bank only offering some services to some people and some services for others depending on an individuals financial status.

Justice Lloyd said Waller (not sure about this bit) brought up BOGOF's and Crow's analagies are jolly unhelpful, particularly analagies that are as unhelpful as that one.

Entire court fell about laughing

Crow continued to argue the analagy and Rabinowitz compared it to 'when you apply for silks is not the same you have a 59 page application form and need 14 references'.

A statement was made that an unauthosied o/draft is only an implied request and mostly are made by the customer unknowingly.

Crow has now finished his part.

Replies will now start to be made to the OFT and case will close on Thursday.

Apologies if no one understands what I have written, as I said the line was bad and I couldn't hear EXC very well, there were people shouting loudly in the background (typical court noises etc).

Sapphire - Legal Beagles.

[righty]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

Oi !!!! What do you mean "eavy mob" LOL

The hearing usually run from around 10 AM ish to 4.30PM ish but can change depending on the use of the Court room etc etc.

We will know tomorrow what the schedule is for Thursday so check in here.

Would be great to meet you Jester, I am hoping to be there on Thursday and am sure Exc will be there anyway. You can't keep him away !!

Budgie

If you can get them to adjourn until the end of November I can come:tinysmile_kiss_t4:

[EXC]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

The procedings were very disjointed this morning so apologies if mine and Saph's posts read that way. This was due to the judges repeatedly asking Crowe for clarifications on points that he had often made hours earlier which interupted the flow of the OFT's submission.

Analogies again feature highly today. Justice Waller repeated an analogy Rabinowitz had made earlier in the appeal of making an application for 'silks' (a legal qualification) where a fee is charged for the consideration for the application regardless of whether the application is successful.

Crowe argued that the analogy was ''quite wrong'' in that an application for silks was a deliberate act, involving filling out 59 pages of forms and submitting 14 references. Whereas a request for an unauthorised overdraft was, as the banks would say, an implied request and one where the customer was often unaware that he was making. Crowe said that the banks had ''not engaged with the judgment on it's own terms'' and had simply used analogies which were not in context.

Justice waller repeated another analogy the banks had made - the 'buy one get one free' offer - to justify charging some customers for some services and not charging others. At this point Crowe had had enough: ''Analogies are jolly unhelpful. Particularly analogies as unhelpful as that one''. Even though this was aimed directly at Justice Waller, the entire courtroom, including all three judges, laughed.

As with yesterday, Crowe concentrated on 62b and the findings of the original judgment that unpaid item fees were ''not a price for a service''. He answered a question from Rabinowitz that if this is the case, Justice Smith's judgment failed to say what in fact they were. Crowe responded by saying that the judgment was only concerned with what they wernt and that the purpose of the regulations and the directives giving guidance to them was ''not to categorise each and every term''.

Crowe again qouted from the PCA report including figures that in 2006 the banks acheived revenues of £2.5bn in unauthorised overdraft charges and £4.1bn in net interest income (NII) on personal current accounts. Crowe explaind to the bench that NII is the surplus banks make from interest they achieve from lending on credit balances and interest charged on unauthorised overdrafts against the interest paid out on credit balances. Justice Clarke remarked ''Ah yes, they pay a pittance in interest''.

All in all it was another fine performance by the OFT's Jonathon Crowe. The banks will now make their reply to the OFT (although it's not clear if that will be by each bank or just lead bank QC Rabinowitz) and then they will turn to the matter of addressing the appeal by the banks on Plain Intelligable Language. It looks like it will finish as scheduled on Thursday.

[fuzzybrain]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

Although i've read (and re read, and re read and re read!!!) the posts, i'm not sure what this is all leading to in terms of it being a successful outcome for claimants

How do you think it is going?? is it going as well as we hoped it would??

If it goes in our favour, what happens next???

[Budgie]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

Excellent reporting as ever, thanks Exc.

I too am pretty fed up with these stupid analogies.

There are over 50 million active personal current accounts in the UK.
Analogies are surely not needed when debating the merits or detrimental aspects of the various terms in question.

The whole point of this appeal was to either confirm or amend Justice Smith's original judgment that the relevant terms of the Banks are subject to an assessment of fairness. I honestly cannot see the appeal court overturning that decison based on the apparantly ill thought out arguments that the Banks have brought to the table.

Let's hope the Banks get stuffed 3-0 and decide to not risk a repeat defeat by appealing the same decision for the historic terms, then we can get down to the juicy issue of whether and how the terms are actually unfair. Something that the OFT, the Banks and all of us have know the answer to throughout the duration of this farcical test case.

Budgie

[Ladidi]

Re: Appeals - Days 1, 2, 3 and 4... so far

Hi Everyone,

So in plain english and simple terms, my head cant take anymore anaolgies...Are we onto a winner or a loser?

I`m sure everyone else reading is probably thinking the same thing..Lol

Thanks

Ladidi