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

[Amethyst]

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

Aye, I have asked him where he got the £1bn from, as the Guardian today said £10bn which is rather extreme lol - and as it doesnt scan with the PCA report figures.....hasnt got back to me yet.

We need to ask MOJ for updated figures, have also asked FSA Press Office to confirm the 971k figure and for a breakdown of it ref hardship cases etc. Very much doubt I will get a proper reply but we can but hope.

he;s also interested in the MOJ 65k figure - we don't have an email on that do we was just telephone with Tom I think.

[EXC]

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

Who wants the MoJ numbers?

I'll ask Tom if he's got it in writing but as for an update I shouldn't think it's changed much even though the figure was obtained in around November. Also I wasn't a slam dunk either and took about 3 weeks of badgering them.

Doubt if you'll get anything out the FSA either. I put in an updated FoIA on the hardship figures but after ignoring my last two I'm not holding my breathe. They rumbled my last alias when I mistakenly forgot who I was sposed to be.



Dear Mr Spooner/Mr Scott

Thank you for your email of 8 June 2008, we have noted the comments made.

We have been so far corresponding with Mr Scott. However, the last email says it was sent by Mr Nick Spooner. Please could you therefore confirm who we are corresponding with and the relationship between Mr Scott and Mr Spooner.

Yours sincerely

Husayn Rahman
Company Secretariat
Financial Services Authority


Dear Mr Rahman

You are communicating with both Mr Scott & Mr Spooner.

Mr Scott has asked me to take over corresponding with you on this matter as, frankly, he is exasperated at the effort and time involved in getting a straight answer to a straight question from the FSA and finds the whole process rather frustrating. And In his own words, I am ''made of sterner stuff''.

As to our relationship, we are friends and business partners. I am god father to his daughter, Emily, and I was best man at his first and third weddings. If I'm honest I'd say we don't get on that well all things considered. He does have a rather annoying habit of taking 3 weeks before responding to his e-mail enquiries and not answering the substance of the questions he's asked, but I'm sure you know the drill.

Nick Spooner

[Tools]

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

msl: I remember that, you are a wicked, wicked man Mr Spooner.

[Guest]

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

Who wants the MoJ numbers?

I'll ask Tom if he's got it in writing but as for an update I shouldn't think it's changed much even though the figure was obtained in around November. Also I wasn't a slam dunk either and took about 3 weeks of badgering them.

Doubt if you'll get anything out the FSA either. I put in an updated FoIA on the hardship figures but after ignoring my last two I'm not holding my breathe. They rumbled my last alias when I mistakenly forgot who I was sposed to be.



Dear Mr Spooner/Mr Scott

Thank you for your email of 8 June 2008, we have noted the comments made.

We have been so far corresponding with Mr Scott. However, the last email says it was sent by Mr Nick Spooner. Please could you therefore confirm who we are corresponding with and the relationship between Mr Scott and Mr Spooner.

Yours sincerely

Husayn Rahman
Company Secretariat
Financial Services Authority


Dear Mr Rahman

You are communicating with both Mr Scott & Mr Spooner.

Mr Scott has asked me to take over corresponding with you on this matter as, frankly, he is exasperated at the effort and time involved in getting a straight answer to a straight question from the FSA and finds the whole process rather frustrating. And In his own words, I am ''made of sterner stuff''.

As to our relationship, we are friends and business partners. I am god father to his daughter, Emily, and I was best man at his first and third weddings. If I'm honest I'd say we don't get on that well all things considered. He does have a rather annoying habit of taking 3 weeks before responding to his e-mail enquiries and not answering the substance of the questions he's asked, but I'm sure you know the drill.

Nick Spooner

ROFL - I'd forgotten about this one, classic stuff.

[Amethyst]

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

Martin Hickman from the Independent - if Tom has it in writing can he forward it to him (can guess at the email lol) we want his proof from FSA in return tho lol.


Thanks for posting that letter again, cracked me up.

[Amethyst]

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

These differences in reported figures are bugging me

(in 2006)levying charges associated with insufficient funds (£2.6 billion).

so 2.6 billion a year - if they refund everything taken assuming limitations act to 8 years (waiver implementation plus 6 years) that would be 20.8 billion (okay ignoring figures would change between the years) thats spread over 12.6 million accounts that have incurred at least one charge (so how much is that per account ? )

Figures in the guardian say they'll have to refund £10bn and the independent and times say £1bn - bit of a difference.

[natweststaffmember]

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

Is that based on amount potentially to refund against amount already refunded?

[agnes]

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

Today's judgment.

to all the 'Great Danes' :beagle:on here
Thanks so much for all the hard work you and the others are putting into this, I am way out of my depth, can't get all the legal jargon, but doing my best to understand some of it! at least there seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel, I might get my money after all. love to all xx

[Amethyst]

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

A3/2008/1396 Office of Fair Trading -v- Abbey National Bank Plc. Application of Claimant for permission to appeal and expedition with appeal to follow if granted.




What were the OFT asking for permission to appeal and where is it written. It was turned down we know that.

[Budgie]

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

My favourite part of the appeal judgment

"113.
This makes it unnecessary to engage with the Banks’ submissions in relation to the whole package argument or the specific services argument. We only wish to add this in relation to the Relevant Charges generally -
i)
No consumer is entitled to the benefit of unarranged borrowing, but only to consideration of the request, or deemed request, for an unarranged overdraft. The judge held at [370] and [371] that consideration of the position before deciding not to pay, which leads to an Unpaid Item Charge, is not a service because the real and essential service is that of paying on a customer’s instruction. We have reached a different view on this point because it appears to us that that consideration is a service, if only because, as was accepted, the Banks owe a contractual duty to do so. However, although a service, we agree with the judge that it is a service of an ancillary or incidental kind.
ii)
The Unpaid Item Charge is not sufficiently directly related to the essential bargain and seems to us to fall at the ancillary end of the spectrum of payment obligations.
iii)
The Paid Item Charges, Guaranteed Paid Item charges and Overdraft Excess charges are also at the ancillary end of the spectrum. These charges are unlikely to be clearly recognisable by a typical consumer as part of the exchange for the current account services. It is particularly relevant that (unlike interest) the magnitude of these charges does not appear to bear a direct relationship to the services provided."


Consumers know that the charges are unfair, the OFT believe that the charges are unfair and three appeal Court Judges have indicated pretty much the same thing.

So, the only people that appear to believe the charges to be fair are the Bankers who, coincidentally, are the people who benefit from the disgusting regime.

[natweststaffmember]

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

A3/2008/1396 Office of Fair Trading -v- Abbey National Bank Plc. Application of Claimant for permission to appeal and expedition with appeal to follow if granted.




What were the OFT asking for permission to appeal and where is it written. It was turned down we know that.

I think they may have been appealing or rather asking that any appeal to the HoL be dismissed.

[LuggerBugs]

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

Just a thought. Since all payments made previously were Gesture of Goodwill, what then? In many cases, those GOGW's fell short of what was actually being paid, but for one reason or another, that is precisely what was accepted by the customer. In some cases there being several thousnad pounds worth of discrepancy.

Now, bearing in mind that condition of acceptance in many cases was to agree NOT to come back for a second go later on, where does that leave those folks? In fact, since the payments were GOGW's in the first place, why shouldn't customers be entitled to a full refund of ALL charges anyway?

Just thinking out loud.

[EXC]

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

Today (Sat 28 Feb) BBC Moneybox on Radio 4 at 12.04

''We are joined by Ian Pollock, one of the BBC's personal finance reporters who was in the court, Angela Knight, chief executive of the BBA and Marc Gander from the Consumer Action Group''

[Amethyst]

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

I would guess the legality of those full and final settlement documents would need testing properly.

And what fun, should be interesting.

Wonder if she'll mention education.

[EXC]

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

I would guess the legality of those full and final settlement documents would need testing properly.

And what fun, should be interesting.

Wonder if she'll mention education.

Well it'll be very entertaining to listen to the planet's most arrogant human being.

Also be interesting to see what Angela Knight has to say.