Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

[StoneLaughter]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Thanks to all involved for reporting and researching and all the other work that has gone on in the background... it means a lot to all of us I'm sure.

So - the next stage (after the HoL has denied leave to appeal this decision) is for the OFT to submit the findings of it's PCA study to "The Courts" and for "The Courts" to listen to all arguments of the OFT and the Banks and ultimately decide:

1. Whether the charges are fair as they stand
2. (presumably) a threshold under which, or a calculation to determine a threshold under which, the charges will be fair assuming they're not now
3. How the banks should pay consumers back (i.e. without being asked, on demand, etc)
4. WHAT the banks should pay back (i.e. charges, charges plus court fees plus interest, charges plus court fees plus compensation... etc)
5. HOW FAST they should pay it back
6. anything else????

OR

Will "The Courts" simply rule "Fair or Not Fair" and leave the banks to work out the mechanics with the OFT? If "The Courts" rule "Not Fair" how likely is it that leave to appeal will be denied?

[tomterm8]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Does anyone have a copy of the judgement by the court of appeal yet?

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Today's judgment.

[Paule]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Does anyone have a copy of the judgement by the court of appeal yet?

Also here with the notes etc

Official Appeal Judgment, Explanatory Note and Press Notice - Legal Beagles

[tomterm8]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Thanks

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Today

It was refreshingly surprising that Tools and Amethyst made it on time although Tom was precictably late and I deliberately let him buy breakfast before telling him he didn't have time to eat it.

Beagles were 7 handed - Me, Nattie, Budgie, Tools, Amethyst, Tom & Jax.

Court 71 was much smaller than the court the appeal hearing was heard in and most of us had to stand. Martin Lewis was the last in but somehow managed to wangle a seat, despite his trademark dodgy shirt and jeans.

Almost none of the bank's or OFT's legal teams were present and there were probably more Beagles than barristers. Megan Murphy aside my only regret was the absence of the delightful and delightfully named OFT junior barrister, Sarah Love.

When the usher asked the court rise (which wasn't diffucult for most of us as we were already stood) only the Master of the Rolls appeared, the other 2 judges absent.

He read out the conclusions of the judgment and the accompanying note and that was it. The whole thing lasted 8 minutes. Although it wasn't clear we'd won until 2 or 3 minutes into it.

Today was tremendously exciting, not just because we won but the unequivocal way in which the judge delivered his verdict and point blank refused the banks' leave to appeal. For the first time I got a real sense that the court was 'on our side' and that really felt good.

And a well deserved spot of lunch and a glass of champagne finished off a truly memorable day.

[tomterm8]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

So, who won the sweepstake?

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Dunno. There was no Megan Murphy and no wigs but the most important figure was the number of pages in the judgment which was not many.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

I believe Enaid did with a 69(no dirty talk please )

[EXC]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

OFT updated Q&As.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/per...ksqa260209.pdf

[Amethyst]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

excellent they got that up so quick.

3. Does the OFT think the banks' terms are unfair?
In August 2008, we wrote to the seven banks and one building society with
whom we have a litigation agreement setting out our approach to the
assessment of fairness and, for seven of them, our concerns that the terms may
be unfair.2
At this stage, no bank's terms have been given a clean bill of health. We will
continue to progress our investigation, in dialogue with the banks, and expect to
reach a final decision on fairness later this year.
If our investigation concludes that the terms are unfair then, we will work with
the banks to identify how any potential subsequent litigation can be managed
sensibly and efficiently.
4. When do you expect this matter to be finally decided?
We will continue to progress our investigation, and expect to reach a final
decision on fairness later in 2009. If this decision is disputed, subsequent
litigation may ensue. If we can resolve any concerns we have about the
charging terms, (for example, if the banks provided satisfactory undertakings to
the OFT) without the need for further, lengthy, court action, then this may be in
the best interest of consumers.

I'll sort out the sidebar and whatnot in the morning am pooped. Was a great day, well worth going, and lovely to see everyone again.

[Amethyst]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

havent read whole thread but just wondered quickly ...in Ganders quote he mentions one of the banks deciding to petition the HoL for permission to appeal ? have the banks made a statement to that effect ?

[jax007]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

And a well deserved spot of lunch and a glass of champagne finished off a truly memorable day.

Bugger Exc ... you never said there was going to be champagne!!!

jax

Great to meet you all at long last anyway ... but SOME of us had to go back to work

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

Bugger Exc ... you never said there was going to be champagne!!!

jax

Great to meet you all at long last anyway ... but SOME of us had to go back to work

And some of us want that excuse

Nice to meet you Jax

[jax007]

Re: Appeal Judgment - 26th February 2009 - OFT v Abbey National Plc & Otrs

I would agree with you Tom but as Ame posted somewhere the main reason the Master of the Rolls gave for refusing leave to appeal is that the point of law in dispute has already been ruled on by the HoLs in the First National Bank case.

If this is the case, which I know it is, can someone explain why this argument was part of the test case when a precedent had already been set in the HoL?

Or have I missed the point, so to speak?

jax