News from the CMC - May (OFT v Banks)

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

19 mins 2 go till they are all back in court and we get more updates for the way forward

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

I suspect we'll not get a lot more than we got yesterday - hopefully we'll get the basis of the appeals tho. Should be some news half three ish.

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

I wish the Judge would lose his temper with them all and shout right give all refund immediately you have all tried mine and the consumers patience for long enough. REPAY with immediate effect and sort out what the charges/fees should be for your so called services and implement them from that date forward only!

I did say I was "wishing" LOL

They should putting their bums on to their seats about now to warm them up..Lol

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

All rise, court is now in session

[righty]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Yes I started it on CAG but I'm NOT advocating setting one up, aaaarg!, it takes ages. I'm advocating directing members to them instead of to the banks because the CU's can now offer current accounts & you can pay your bills via DD's

[righty]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

And You Won't Get Ripped Off

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Okay very very quick as i have to get kids from school 2 mins ago

HBOS CLYDESDALE ABBEY AND BARCLAYS sought permission to appeal the PIL judgements from april 24th, and the Judge has REFUSED permission for this.

NO APPEAL MADE BY OFT in respect of PIL


sorry very short more when I get back unless Budgie and EXc manage to get on sooner xxx

[TANZARELLI]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Yeah but no one lost any money.

Very very few either go bust or are absorbed by other Unions.

It's an inconvenience if it happens because you may have to set up your DD's again but that's no reason not to use them. Some have been going for many many years. They have charitable status, are non-profit organisations & their brief is to help the financially & socially excluded & all those who have difficulty obtaining credit or banking services in general

Even though my family do have bank accounts we are all members of our local CU into which we pay regular monthly amounts via DD.

Apart from the you never know when we might need it syndrome we feel that by being members we are supporting or local community

To add to this righty they make every effort to offer support and generally don't just lend to people for the sake of lending to them they aim to be responsible lenders.

Most credit unions loans will cost you no more than 1% a month on the reducing balance of the loan (an APR of 12.7%). What this means for example is that if you borrowed £1000 over 1 year, you would repay no more than £1067 in total. Many credit unions charge less, some may charge more but by law this cannot be more than 2% a month on the reducing balance (an APR of 26.8%). You can find out about what loans and interest rates are on offer at your local credit union by contacting them via the Credit Union Search section.

Credit union loans come with no hidden charges and no penalties for repaying the loan early. Life insurance is built in, at no cost to the borrower, so if you were to die before you had repaid the loan, insurance would repay the loan for you.

http://www.abcul.coop/page/about/borrowing.cfm

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Forgive me for asking but is this a good thing that the banks have been denied this and that the OFT do not want to appeal PIL?

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Its good news that the Judge has declined the banks wishes to appeal the PIL aspects.

Not so sure about the OFt decision not to appeal.

Am going to have a reread of those parts on the judgements...i'll also get the relevant bits from the judgements for HBOs,Clydesdale, Barclays and Abbey.

can see Bud online now so am sure he'll write the full details up.

[tomterm8]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

What are the PIL aspects? Do you mean the plain english language aspects? If so, what part did they want to appeal?

Edit: I've found the other thread, so no worries.

[Budgie]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Exc and Budgie reporting from Pret a Manger.

Please note that this post may not be reproduced on any other site wothout written permission from either Exc or Budgie.


Quick report on todays proceedings

1) No mention was made of the Banks appeal regarding UTCCR aspects. permission to appeal was granted yesterday by the Judge.

2) the OFT opened by updating regarding the PCA report. They confirmed that significant progress had been made since the test case was announced. But resources were limted and the Test Case has taken away considerable time that could have been allocated to this task. A further update will follow on at the CMC ( 7th 8th July )

3) OFT do not seek permission to appeal PIL aspects
They had overnight discussed situation with the four Banks ( Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale and HBOS ) who had not been given a clean sheet by the Judge in original judgment. There was a dispute between the OFT and the Banks. The OFT felt that this area needed resolution so that clear guidance could be given to the County Courts. Hopwever the OFT had not had suffcient time to reach a clear decision regarding seeking permission to appeal and were concerned about cost and time implications so would not be doing so.

4) The above four Banks requested permission to appeal the PIL aspects in relation to their own terms.
Bascially they all sought permission on grounds of :-
a) Real prospects of success
b) Serious financial consequences particularly in relation to County Court claims
c) knock on effects to historic terms

Some interesting comments from the Judge.
In reply to Abbey's Malik, "Without being discourteous, I hope that I have grasped your arguments" and in response to Salter of Clydesdale the Judge said that " of the terms. Many intelligent people wouldnt understand them, for the few SUPERSTARS who manage to understand then, MAYBE !!
and in response to HBOS's Dicker suggestion that if Customers FULLY read the TandCs each time they required to check there contractural obligations, it was clear they were in PIL. The Judge commented "You mean he would keep having to re-read the leaflets. At some stage, in a few years, he would want to get on with his life !!!!!

The OFT invited the Judge to dismiss the applications on the following grounds :-
a) No real prospect of success
b) No Bank had challenged the points of principle relating to PIL in the judgment
c) The time managment effects
d) That the financial consequences to the Banks were dependant upon the putcome and not relevent.
The Judge accepted the OFT's arguments and dismissed the appeal of all four Banks

Some discussion followed regarding the joint draft order. Many minor points were discussed including a draft agenda for the CMC on 7th / 8th July. It was confirmed that Judgement relating to historic terms ( UTCCR aspects and penalties under common law will be discussed at this CMC). The Judge confimed that he would be contiunuing to look at historic terms in the meantime and was still awaiting some skeletal arguments from the Banks and the updated G1 and G2 annexes from the OFT.

Exc and Budgie

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

In a nutshell is this good for us or bad or no different?

[Budgie]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Forgive me for asking but is this a good thing that the banks have been denied this and that the OFT do not want to appeal PIL?

Yes we think it is a good thing that the Banks have been denied permission to appeal. Purely from the time management point of view and the demonstration of the confidence that the Judge has in his original judgment. Bear in mind that the Banks could challenge this decision to deny permission to appeal with the Court of appeal anyway.

We also think that the OFT have decided not to appeal the PIL judgment from a resource point of view and also because they do not believe they have a good chance of success.

Please note that this post may not be reproduced on any other site without written permission from either Exc or Budgie.

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Pret a Manger lol no idea why that amuses me

I've popped up the judgement bits the banks wanted to appeal on another thread for reference.