9 December hearing

[righty]

Re: 9 December hearing

'****er' perhaps:santa_smiley:

[Ed1237]

Re: 9 December hearing

Well done Budgie, Hopefully the Judgement will go our way with RBS

[helpmeclaim]

Re: 9 December hearing

What does this mean if it doeosnt go our way?

[Smasher]

Re: 9 December hearing

What does this mean if it doeosnt go our way?

Very little imo. This is only one of many issues and penalties is just one description. I have always been of the opinion that costs must be examined as the majority of claims held up in the system are under historic T&Cs which state that charges were to cover costs. Either that, or allow these types of claims to proceed as normal.
The fundamental issue that bankers presented the charges to be something they clearly were not, has yet to be dealt with. Whatever you want to call them doesn't matter, there will be some legislation that has been broken because these terms were deliberately misleading.

Personally I think possibly deliberate misrepresentation under the trades descriptions act should give them no room for escape if it applies, but it is not on the test case agenda atm as far as I'm aware. I just hope that the OFT don't simply let this issue go just because they can't be called penalties. We need an examination to establish what they are, not what they are not.
It would be like me declaring that my dog is an elephant, then having a debate in which we establish that its definitely not a cat and ending the debate there..

[bloomingflower]

Re: 9 December hearing

Very little imo. This is only one of many issues and penalties is just one description. I have always been of the opinion that costs must be examined as the majority of claims held up in the system are under historic T&Cs which state that charges were to cover costs. Either that, or allow these types of claims to proceed as normal.
The fundamental issue that bankers presented the charges to be something they clearly were not, has yet to be dealt with. Whatever you want to call them doesn't matter, there will be some legislation that has been broken because these terms were deliberately misleading.

Personally I think possibly deliberate misrepresentation under the trades descriptions act should give them no room for escape if it applies, but it is not on the test case agenda atm as far as I'm aware. I just hope that the OFT don't simply let this issue go just because they can't be called penalties. We need an examination to establish what they are, not what they are not.


It would be like me declaring that my dog is an elephant, then having a debate in which we establish that its definitely not a cat and ending the debate there..

Hi :grinningelf:

Well done Bud for your brilliant report of this months hearing.


I totally agree with what you have just said Smasher, there is too much faffing about with regards to what the charges are. It's about time they(banks) just stop dressing them up in disguise and the OFT need to delve in a bit deeper and get the banks to'spit' out what they really are. Think we have all waited long enough, but the whole issue just seems to be dragging on and on.......


That last bit made me laugh Smasher.. clever analogy tho.
I have a cat that has mannerisms of a dog and is the size of an elephant, funny, but true PMSL

bfxx

[Smasher]

Re: 9 December hearing

I have a cat that has mannerisms of a dog and is the size of an elephant, funny, but true PMSL
bfxx

Well in that case I'm glad its not me & you in the courtroom doing this test case!

[bloomingflower]

Re: 9 December hearing

Well in that case I'm glad its not me & you in the courtroom doing this test case!

Too true, too true lol. BTW I forgot to say,it's great to see you here on LB Smasher :grinningelf:

bfxx

[Smasher]

Re: 9 December hearing

Thanks BF, nice to see you too!

[Budgie]

Re: 9 December hearing

PMSL at that Avatar.

Classic !!!!

[TANZARELLI]

Re: 9 December hearing

Quality avatar smasher LMFAO

[bloomingflower]

Re: 9 December hearing

:hohoho: I wonder who it is under that guise? Rofl



bfxx

[Smasher]

Re: 9 December hearing

Oops, now look what I started. I used it for a while a couple of years ago on my old site. Bloomingflower (BF) reminded me about it. No disrespect of course, just me playing the fool as ever..