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

Memorandum from Mr Ron Parr - http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache...&ct=clnk&gl=uk ???

[Yoda]

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

you got a source for the information please cos I can't find the story anywhere at the minute?

here you go.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/12920855/B...isMemos2502091

[PocketTheDifference]

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

Does this help us in any sort of way?? and if so what way (and if not whats it all for)

are you exec and guys giving up on stayed claims etc, I think its time i gave up had the repyl from court basically telling me to give up (Thats what they would like anyway) Im just with everybody else dead end road and no place to go. Its so stupid from the banks, I would hope that letting people go on with a claim would slightly help the econmony and on a personal note would put me back on lifes track 100% and a little left over, becuse if i won a claim I would be able to pay all debts, all bills. so technically, if they had never stolen this cash of me i wouldn't be in debt.

[Amethyst]

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

What reply have you had from the court ?

[Not_Watson]

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

Well put onepisedbank_customer !

Apparently as of today we are officially out of recession now as well - so everything is alright - tell that to the ordinary man in the street.

I've said it before - it's a big club - and we're not in it !

[Yoda]

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

There seems to be a new defence on the PC site.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Anyone read this? it seems that penalty charges on mortgages are unfair, so why not on overdrafts?

http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/...ortgage-refund

HUNDREDS of thousands of home owners could be in line to collect hefty refunds for unfair mortgage charges.


Lenders face being forced to hand back millions of pounds in fees imposed on customers who missed their monthly loan payments.
One firm has been fined £2.8million and made to return £7.7million to borrowers when it was found to have acted unfairly.
The crackdown by watchdog the Financial Services Authority is likely to lead to claims by hundreds of thousands of home owners who believe they have been harshly penalised.
Terry Balfour, of insolvency specialist IVA.com, said: “It’s good to see the financial watchdog stepping in on the side of the thousands of borrowers in arrears with their mortgage.
“Banks and other mortgage lenders all too often impose punitive charges when their customers get into trouble with repayments.
“It is understandable that a modest fee for additional administration may be imposed, but piling substantial penalties on to households which are clearly struggling is unnecessary and will only serve to further line the bulging coffers of many lenders.
“When people are in trouble with their mortgage they need help and advice and a bit of a breathing space – not to be hounded for even more money which they cannot repay.”

The FSA fined lender Gmac-RFC for how it treated customers between October 2004 and November 2008.
The fine was partly due to the £45 a month levied on borrowers who went into arrears.
The watchdog said this was “excessive” and did not reflect administration costs.
However as many as 30 lenders – including Bradford & Bingley, the Derbyshire and Cheshire Building Societies and specialist lenders like Kensington and Morgan Stanley – have a similar charging structure.

[Amethyst]

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

It isn't a defence, more a please let me keep the claim in court and send in new particulars, so yes a defence to the strike out applications. I have some thoughts on it, but am keeping an eye on Claireh who is in court with it today, so lets see how that goes first.


Re the Daily Express Article - it is an utter misinterpretation of the facts - have a look in the announcements forum for GMAC RFC. The FSA should be announcing some action in the next few days but it is unlikely to be standard late payment fees etc - possibly late payment fees charged where repayment of arrears is being made would be the closest thing.

[Yoda]

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

And here;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8480073.stm

New rules to protect mortgage holders who are in arrears have been proposed by the Financial Services Authority. The FSA says it wants to ensure that those borrowers are treated fairly, especially ones who have borrowed from specialist lenders.
It wants to ensure that repossession is a last resort and that borrowers in arrears are not levied unfair charges. ( My emphasis)
The proposals are part of the FSA's current review of the way the mortgage market works.
"Today's proposals underline the standards that firms must meet and will help to ensure that homeowners in financial difficulties are treated fairly," said Lesley Titcomb of the FSA.
"Lenders need to be in no doubt of their obligations to customers who fall behind with payments and must realise that such circumstances are not an opportunity to create further profits," ( My emphasis)she added.

[Amethyst]

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

lol, oh yep they've announced their next moves today - FSA sets out tough new rules to ensure that borrowers in arrears are treated fairly and to reduce levels of mortgage fraud - I'll do an announcement thread on the issues raised within it. See if it does extend as far as people would like it to. http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/cp/cp10_02.pdf is the consultation.

[PocketTheDifference]

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

ye out of a reccesion by what was it 0.01%....worst out of any big country that was in it.

[Yoda]

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

Ah, I see you are over at the PC as well Amethyst. You peeps get everywhere!

I didn't realise as the only site I reallly come on is this.

Ah well, There should be more people like you and Natwest et al helping people all over like you do, it must take up a lot of your time!

It makes me smile when I think I have found something and you guys are already in the mix of it on another site.!!

Thanks for everything you do guys/gals you are special people.

[PocketTheDifference]

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

What reply have you had from the court ?

No word perfect but somthing along the lines of if you dont reply in 14 days it will be forgotten haha

[Amethyst]

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

Ok - is it from the court or the bank ? Is it an order ? Do you want to continue ? if so will help all I can but need to know exactly what the position is.

[Amethyst]

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

Letter from court


Any application for permission to amend the Particulars of Claim should be made at the same time. in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in The Office of Fair Trading (respondents) v Abbey National plc & others (appellants) [2009] UKSC 6 the Particulars of Claim will require amendment if the Claimant intends to pursue the claim. A draft of the proposed amendment should accompany the application notice.

Unless the claimant is fee exempt, the applications will attract a court fee.


SOOOOOO better to wait and defend a strike app.

[PocketTheDifference]

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

What do you mean by - SOOOOOO better to wait and defend a strike app. Sorry Ame Im increadibly slow ...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Im soo slow guys, I'll tell you whats bloody unfair, How can they justfy me putting £2k in my bank (wages) a month and have the cheek to say its worth 0.02p interest, but charge me £35 interest for just missing a D/D
Surely thats unfair charges!!
What im getting at is my £2k is worth 2p to them until... i miss a payment not even worht 1/4 of that but then its instantly worth £35.
I hope you see where im going here...