OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

[Amethyst]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Shame that things like that happen every day to individuals and groups and unless someone like watchdog threatens to expose them people struggle their arses off to pay the charges sinking under the pressure of the seemingly never ending spiral of debt caused by the banks. Reminds us why we are here. These things can't be allowed to continue happening.

[ROBSTER]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

OFT blows £950k on banks case - City AM

This is how much it cost the OFT to litigate in the courts. Quite cheap imho.

Cheap as Chips!

And at the risk of repeating myself: How much are the banks coining each and every day as a result of the "disputed" default/penalty/service(?) charges and interest thereon?

VV
VV
VVVVVVVVVVVV
VVVVVVV
VVVVV
VVV
V

[Amethyst]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Experts claim the cases were over factual aspects of law, not involving costly or lengthy appearances that could command such fees.

ah of course Crow is on minimum wage and only spent 10 mins arguing the case didnt he !

Roll on the slating of the OFT and campaign by the 'why don't you manage your money better' crowd.

I thought it would be more than that tbh, and I hope it goes up ! i would like to see the actual FOI response, and the breakdowns. And how much the banks spent !

This may be like the 850bn to banks rubbish spouted last week, anything can be spun to prove a point.

Are there any other high profile cases to bring comparison against ?


Also 1.3 million cases on hold so its less than £1 per person ACTIVELY reclaiming. I'm sure people would contribute their share if people are so concerned about it.

[PocketTheDifference]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

At Least they are chargered for what it costs and not inflating everything!!

Have an Idea for HSBC if that example I posted was that easy to refund, Select All, And REFUND hey presto we are all happy. Next step to take in this case, WATCHDOG!

[ROBSTER]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

[QUOTE=Amethyst;142383]ah of course Crow is on minimum wage and only spent 10 mins arguing the case didnt he !

Roll on the slating of the OFT and campaign by the 'why don't you manage your money better' crowd.

I thought it would be more than that tbh, and I hope it goes up ! i would like to see the actual FOI response, and the breakdowns. And how much the banks spent !

This may be like the 850bn to banks rubbish spouted last week, anything can be spun to prove a point.

Are there any other high profile cases to bring comparison against ?
DIDN'T I READ SOMEWHERE THAT WE (THE GOVERNMENT) SPENT OVER £100 MILLION ON "ADVISORS" TO GIVE THEM THAT "EXCELLENT ADVISE" ON HOW TO BAIL OUT THE BANKS?

[Amethyst]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Have asked OFT for copy of FOI response and asked if they are going to make any comment on the story. Also mentioned my point about it being less than £1 per active claimant .

[PocketTheDifference]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Are there any other high profile cases to bring comparison against ?
DIDN'T I READ SOMEWHERE THAT WE (THE GOVERNMENT) SPENT OVER £100 MILLION ON "ADVISORS" TO GIVE THEM THAT "EXCELLENT ADVISE" ON HOW TO BAIL OUT THE BANKS?[/quote]


I hope your Joking, Thats why they ARE laughing at us all, We pay the bill for a case they walk away with, We pay the tax to pay for their advice!! Jeeezzzz

[Centium5000]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Just found this document, a thorough review of illegality and immorality in contract law:

http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/978019...pters/web2.pdf

I read it in the context of banks deliberately targetting their least wealthy customers for their profits. Immoral? Contrary to public policy?

[PocketTheDifference]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Sounds like a little break through ahah!
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Would you mind posting restrictions at work and all that!

[EXC]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

i would like to see the actual FOI response, and the breakdowns.

It should be published here in due course The Office of Fair Trading: Previous requests and responses and here The Office of Fair Trading: A to Z list of information published under the Freedom of Information Act

I see someone put in a request for information about how the £12 credit card default charge threshold was calculated - word for word the same as the one Wild Billy and myself did.


Although we didn't get it either, we at least got closer and established that the OFT thought that the charges were ''unfairly high''. Mind you it did take nearly 2 years of internal reviews and complaints to the Information Commisioner. Annex 6 is the most interesting.

[Centium5000]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

So a returned item / over limit is a 'default' is it? (in both Annex 5 & 6 above)

Surely they mean 'service charge'?

Good work EXC.

[Amethyst]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Remember thats on Credit Cards - where the charges are much clearer and more likely to be classed as capable of being penal, as well at the OFTs view that the terms are highly unfair under the UTCCR. Just look forward to when / if they take that kettle into the court room.

I do like the way the 'Banks Terminology' is treated like its special - if its a default - then its a bloomin default, regardless of what the 'Banks Terminology' is.

[PocketTheDifference]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Wghy are Credit card Charges £12 seems kind of fair and normal banking fees more than double that??? Oh And this is Fair..?

[davidl]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

The problem ****ed bank customer is that it doent matter if they are fair of not the oft cant investigate them so all we can do now is bend over and assume position unless the oft come with a new leagle case and grant a new waiver that is not compleatly one sided.

[Amethyst]

Re: OFT v Banks Judgment 25th November 2009 - 9.45am- Supreme Court - Test case

Just a quick note to say thank you to all contributers to the discussions on here and throughout the site so far. We have put together a lot of peoples views and arguments on the test case continuance and sent it over to the OFT following wednesdays meeting, similarly to the PCA study response we submitted last year. So everyone has had at least a small part to play in the way things goes forward.

xx