News from the CMC - May (OFT v Banks)

[NoneJudgemental]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

cant find the thanks button but thanks for the useful info

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

So in a nutshell, IMHO, The banks have been denied appeal for PIL OFT dont want to appeal PIL. The judge is miffed that OFT did not have details of costs as banks were not very quick at coming back with the information and when they did they changed their T & C's again!
So, we still have the "stays" in place, pending outcomes on 7th and 8th July at next CMC meeting to determine the way forward and if "Stays" should remain in place due the current application for them needing to be renewed about that time.
If all goes, the way predicted we could see "stays" remaining in place at least until Autum/ Christmas time when we all know what is happening and where we are going with all of this pending to get either our monies back plus a little compensation ( If we are lucky enough).
Or have I got it wrong somewhere? Please feel free to correct me

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

cant find the thanks button but thanks for the useful info

Thanks button on bottom right hand corner with the tumb sticking in the air

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

So in a nutshell, IMHO, The banks have been denied appeal for PIL OFT dont want to appeal PIL. The judge is miffed that OFT did not have details of costs as banks were not very quick at coming back with the information and when they did they changed their T & C's again!
So, we still have the "stays" in place, pending outcomes on 7th and 8th July at next CMC meeting to determine the way forward and if "Stays" should remain in place due the current application for them needing to be renewed about that time.
If all goes, the way predicted we could see "stays" remaining in place at least until Autum/ Christmas time when we all know what is happening and where we are going with all of this pending to get either our monies back plus a little compensation ( If we are lucky enough).
Or have I got it wrong somewhere? Please feel free to correct me

Its not really costs in the PCA report - as far as I know none of the banks have revealed these anywhere as yet.

this is re the PCA report

1. What work is the OFT doing relating to personal current accounts?
There is widespread concern about whether current accounts provide value for the UK consumer, and in particular whether unarranged overdrafts are fair.
The best way to get a good outcome for consumers is to make sure that consumers understand what they are paying and if necessary, can move to banks that offer better value for money.
To achieve this outcome we launched a personal current account market study in April 2007 to consider the wider questions about competition and value for money in the provision of personal current accounts, such as:

• transparency of costs to consumers, and
• ease of switching.

We will be publishing the study in the next few months having taken account of the implications of the test case judgment.

We also launched an investigation into the fairness of personal current account unarranged overdraft charges (the relevant charges) under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs).

Yes re the Stays - will be in place till July at least - then i believe the FSA is due to review waiver anyways so fits in quite neatly.

Then likely they'll be kept on hold till Christmas

Think some work in this area needed by campaign groups - ESPECIALLY ON HARDSHIP ISSUES

Not so sure about the compensation bit.

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

I guess I got some of it right then..Lol

Oh well what will be, will be....

I have waited 14 months upto now, whats a few more months?..ALOT when you could do with the money now..

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Yep and its annoying - people are losing their homes when a refund and a lowering of these charges would go a good way to stop that happening.

We need to lobby FSA on Hardship NOW

[Ladidi]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Oh I AGREE with you whole heartedly

The shambles of this, Abbey write and state they are going to take the money on such and such a date and if you dont have the funds they take all credits that hit the account until it is paid then clobber you again the next month. Barclays meanwhile dont tell you they are taking the money, they just help themselves when they see fit!!! It dont matter that it might be your bread and butter money.. I dont know about the other banks. But they have all set a trend amongst themselves and for years they was allowed to do this, and they are STILL doing this even now.

But you try and go into the BANKS and HELP YOURSELF, hell your a** would be in jail so fast you feet wouldn't touch the ground with god knows what thrown at you..

What the banks have done they see it is a moral obligation, we are allowed to do this, we dont care!! But WE have to wait for due process to take it course before we can have what they have taken over a long period of time causing god knows what along the way...It's blooming well annoying and thats a polite way of putting it!

Rant over...Sorry

[EXC]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Just had this from OFT.

[Budgie]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

It's up on their website now as well.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news/press/2008/66-081

It's very well written. Even Dave from CAG can probably understand it. ( Well maybe not ) LOL

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

OFT statement on Case Management Conference

66/08 23 May 2008
At the Case Management Conference, the judge gave the Banks permission to appeal his finding that the relevant terms can be assessed for fairness under the UTCCRs. Also, four of the Banks were refused permission to appeal the judge's findings that some of their terms are not in plain intelligible language. The OFT is not appealing any of the judge's findings. All the parties are agreed that the appeal process should happen as quickly as possible and are working with the court to achieve this.
Mr Justice Smith's Judgment of 24 April 2008 relates to relevant terms in current agreements between the Banks and customers and is restricted to those terms that were considered by the court. There will be a further hearing on 7, 8 and 9 July 2008 to determine whether the relevant terms in the Banks basic and historic personal current account contracts can also be assessed for fairness under the UTCCRs and whether they are capable of being penalties at common law.
OFT is continuing with its investigation into the fairness of the relevant terms in the Banks current terms and conditions. During July, we aim to be in a position to begin engaging with the Banks in relation to our preliminary views on the question of fairness.
NOTES

1.In April 2007 the OFT announced its investigation into the fairness of terms relating to unarranged overdraft and returned item fees (referred to as 'unarranged overdraft charges'). This followed on from the OFT's initial review of such terms, where the OFT concluded that it shared the public concern about the level and incidence of bank current account charges.
2. In July 2007 the OFT entered into an agreement with the largest current account providers in relation to bringing a test case in order to ensure an orderly and timely resolution of the legal issues associated with its investigation. This stage of the case was heard between 17 January and 8 February 2008, and dealt with certain preliminary issues of legal principle relating to whether the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs) apply to the banks' various current terms and conditions and whether the charges are capable of amounting to penalties at common law.
3. In April 2008 the judge ruled that:

• the UTCCRs do apply to the banks' current T&Cs for unarranged overdraft charges
• the banks' current T&Cs are in plain intelligible language (PIL) except for Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale and HBOS' T&Cs which are not in PIL in certain specific and minor respects, and
• the banks' current T&Cs (and some historic T&Cs – that is, terms no longer in use) are not penalties at common law.

It is anticipated that Mr Justice Smith will be making an order to give effect to this Judgment next week.
The question of whether or not the T&Cs providing for the charges are actually unfair was not addressed in the stage 1A judgment (this is being addressed by our overall investigation and will be dealt with in stage 2 of the test case process).
4. The other parties to the test case are Abbey National plc, Barclays Bank plc, Clydesdale Bank plc, HBOS plc, HSBC Bank plc, Lloyds TSB Bank plc, Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc, and Nationwide Building Society. Together these current account providers account for about 90 per cent of personal current accounts in the UK.
5. In the course of its work on the issue we have liaised closely with the Financial Services Authority and have also held discussions with the main banks.
6. The OFT has also been conducting a market study which is taking a wide-ranging look at whether the personal current account market is working well for consumers. In particular we will assess the extent to which consumers help drive competition. The OFT plans to publish our findings in the next few weeks.
7. Further information on the background to the case can be found on this website. The FSA has also published guidance for consumers on its website. Download the High Court judgment (pdf 652 kb).
8. Relevant Terms: Terms in standard form Personal Current Accounts between the bank and the customer that provide for unarranged overdraft charges.
9. Basic and Historic Personal Account Contracts: This includes certain non-mainstream current accounts also.

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Can someone please explain this to me Ta

3. In April 2008 the judge ruled that:

• the UTCCRs do apply to the banks' current T&Cs for unarranged overdraft charges
• the banks' current T&Cs are in plain intelligible language (PIL) except for Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale and HBOS' T&Cs which are not in PIL in certain specific and minor respects, and
• the banks' current T&Cs (and some historic T&Cs – that is, terms no longer in use) are not penalties at common law.

It is anticipated that Mr Justice Smith will be making an order to give effect to this Judgment next week.

the bold bit pls. ta.

[EXC]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

I think that means a declaration but I'm not 100%

[scoobydoo]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

why was the judge critisng the OFT for not having the fairness arguments ready - when the banks are going to appeal aginst the fact that the UTCCRs apply to them anyway?

Do you think he means that if the OFT said the charges were fair - the banks would be wasting their time appealing?

[Amethyst]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Well i think he is very confident in his initial judgement which is a good thing so hes happy to continue working with his findings in that judgement. The appeals seperate isnt it.

[Budgie]

Re: News from the CMC (OFT v Banks)

Can someone please explain this to me Ta

Quote:
Originally Posted by OFT 22nd May
3. In April 2008 the judge ruled that:

• the UTCCRs do apply to the banks' current T&Cs for unarranged overdraft charges
• the banks' current T&Cs are in plain intelligible language (PIL) except for Abbey, Barclays, Clydesdale and HBOS' T&Cs which are not in PIL in certain specific and minor respects, and
• the banks' current T&Cs (and some historic T&Cs – that is, terms no longer in use) are not penalties at common law.

It is anticipated that Mr Justice Smith will be making an order to give effect to this Judgment next week.

the bold bit pls. ta.
__________________
.

It means exactly what it says.

The Judge will issue an order to give effect to his Judgment. The order will also contain details of the various permission to appeal requests made against this judgement and his decisions regarding those requests. The Order will also contain details of what the Judge requires ( basically what the OFT and the Banks have agreed or have been told to do ) with regards to the next steps, such as producing skeletal arguments and updated G1 and G2 annexes ready for the CMC on 7th, 8th, 9th May. This is quite a normal Court procedure.