Dyfrigj v Santander (bank charges) - dismissed in court - no costs Jan 2011

[TUTTSI]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

I wish you the best of luck and will be looking forward to hearing the outcome from you tomorrow and especially if you win and how it went.

Tuittsi x

[mollymalone]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Best of luckxxxx

[EXC]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Ame has got it right by suggesting you make it more 'personal' and how you paying for another persons free banking on any month through what can be either a mistake or your financial hardship creates an unfair relationship.

I don't think that Ame is suggesting that the claimant should apply the free-if-in-credit banking model to the issue of unfair relationships as the test case judgment specifically ruled that you couldn't.

But you are right that the claim should be heavily personalised with examples in order to demonstrate unfairness in the relationship.

[dyfrigj]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

I don't think anyone will be suprised to hear that my claim was dismissed. The judge relied heavily on the OFT's statement that they did not think that any further cases had merit. I tried to argue that the OFT were not relevant, and that their opinion was not in any way legally binding, but this was ignored. The judge stated that he would only consider "exceptional" cases (i.e. hardship cases) and not arguments about the general fairness of charges. He accepted Santander's skeleton argument in full, and stated that he would be adopting it word-for-word as his official judgment.
The silver lining is that I didn't have a penny of costs awarded against me.

However, I think that I had a lucky escape. The barrister said that he would not be seeking ordinary costs, but that he wanted his travelling and subsistence reimbursed by me. Considering that he had driven from London to Anglesey (a round trip of 530 miles) and stayed overnight in a hotel, this would have been costs in the region of £400 - significantly higher than the 10% of claimed sum usually awarded in Small Claims. Luckily, the Judge refused his request, and I left the court without having to give Santander a penny. Considering that this case has probably cost them in excess of £10,000 to defend, I'm fairly pleased about that.

[EXC]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Well done. At least you had the temerity to get them into to court, which is an achievement in itself.

It is interesting that the judge said that he would consider cases of hardship, which I didn't think would be the case.

Can you post up the judgment when you get it?

[enaid]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Well done anyway and I am really pleased you got nil costs.
It is also very helpful for others to see your case and for you to come back and report what went on, even though you did not get the result you would have hoped for.
Thank you and best of luck with anything else like this that you take on.
Enaid x

[The Debt Star]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

I left the court without having to give Santander a penny. Considering that this case has probably cost them in excess of £10,000 to defend, I'm fairly pleased about that.

Well, good for you

But then again they'll just pass on their loss to the customer s in rip-off bank and loan charges

[TUTTSI]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Well done hun for standing up to them, I have stood up to them in the past and given them a run for their money againts one of their barristers in court on hardship in the early days of the test case and still I got nowhere as they seem to have everything stacked on their side.

So I am not sure about the hardship aspect, but it would be worth peeps trying that route if they were in that situation.

Tuttsi x

[leclerc]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Well done. At least you had the temerity to get them into to court, which is an achievement in itself.

It is interesting that the judge said that he would consider cases of hardship, which I didn't think would be the case.

Can you post up the judgment when you get it?

Just highlighting this point which is quite interesting to say the least.

A question perhaps for others to answer but would the ECJ case which was around the Spanish bank have helped with the argument refuting the OFT decision?

[EXC]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

A question perhaps for others to answer but would the ECJ case which was around the Spanish bank have helped with the argument refuting the OFT decision?

I don't think so as the Spanish case came after the OFT reaching their decision not to continue the UTCCR investigation.

[Amethyst]

Re: Santander Legal Arguments

Thanks dyfrigj, and well done today and thank goodness you had a lovely judge. The opposition sending someone up from London shows they havent become any more complacent with these cases and are ready to fight full on any one who tries.

Note for everyone - I wouldn't put too much store in the judge saying he would only hear hardship cases, EXCEPTIONAL HARDSHIP caused pretty directly by the bank charges where you have done everything in your power to avoid them and sort things out and been shot down at every turn by the bank, and can show this, then yes, one that springs to mind might be the lady who had her £2k overdraft removed without notice may be able still to reclaim any charges incurred directly because of the banks action, but that could go through the FOS quite comfortably without the need to risk a court battle. I still would not recommend any one goes into court and I wouldn't like to see people taking that comment generally as hardship cases are ok to go to court - they are not - particularly as many claiming hardship are not in actual full on detrimental hardship due to the banks charges. (sorry just wanted to make my thoughts on that absolutely clear save any half cockedness)

[Brian]

Re: Dyfrigj v Santander (bank charges) - dismissed in court - no costs Jan 2011

Couple of things on this case:

I find it totally mindblowing that they've sent a BARRISTER to a county court against an LIP? (Ame I like the way you think...:good conspiracy theory here)

The judge sent a message here on the issue of costs, which is going to get picked up by various, that's a given. I went to Court in 1993 over a contracts issue (not getting paid for a job) I lost the case due to lack of evidence BUT the judge did not award costs against me, and there was almost a punchup over it with the judge telling the agent to "bugger off" when he pleaded to the point of arguing with him over costs that I should be forking out for.

food for thought here for future stuff on Bank Charges... I would be quite disturbed if I was a Bank over this outcome.

[dyfrigj]

Re: Dyfrigj v Santander (bank charges) - dismissed in court - no costs Jan 2011

To clarify a little on the hardship aspect. What the judge said was that he was not prepared to look at whether bank charges in general constituted an unfair relationship between creditor and debtor under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. He said that would be willing to look at exceptional cases, where it could be argued that the specific relationship between a single customer and the bank may be construed as unfair - i.e. where charges had led to hardship on the behalf of the customer, or where the bank had acted unreasonably in implementing the charges.

I did point out that the FOS would be the natural route for such cases to be pursued, and he agreed with me. I assume that he then meant that he would look at exceptional cases where routes such as the FOS had failed.

In terms of a judgment, he stated that if pressed for a formal, written, judgment, he would be adopting the skeleton argument presented by Santander as his judgment (which I have already posted here). If I do recieve anything else in writing, I'll post it up on here.

Interestingly, I asked the barrister why Santander had not made application to have the case allocated to another track. He was slightly reluctant to answer, but when I pressed him he suggested that they didn't want to take it to the multi-track, because the precedent set by the multi-track would carry more weight than the precedent set in the small claims. This suggests that Santander were realistically entertaining the possibility of losing.

I'm not a lawyer, and have had to fit preparation for this case into my very busy life (3 jobs, 2 kids, 1 wife). The judge commended me for the way in which I presented the case, but made it clear that Santander had blown me out of the water. However, I wonder whether someone with legal experience might be able to take this further? Not on my behalf, personally, but building on what has been presented here. The skeleton argument which I've posted here outlines the case that Santander made. I wonder whether anyone on this forum is capable of putting together a response to this, which might be used by another claimaint?

[Amethyst]

Re: Dyfrigj v Santander (bank charges) - dismissed in court - no costs Jan 2011

dyfrigj

Thank so much, your reporting of the case is already helping others.

Anthony Scrivener QC, who wrote the opinion for us last year, has a copy of your case skeleton arguments, as do a few other people on the consumers side who are working hard on getting cases back into court at a higher level than county court. I'll also forward a copy to Mike Dailly who is running a case in Scotland at the moment.

Interesting what the barrister's opinion was on why the case had not been pushed for multitrack (and thank goodness in your case!).

[EXC]

Re: Dyfrigj v Santander (bank charges) - dismissed in court - no costs Jan 2011

However, I wonder whether someone with legal experience might be able to take this further? Not on my behalf, personally, but building on what has been presented here. The skeleton argument which I've posted here outlines the case that Santander made. I wonder whether anyone on this forum is capable of putting together a response to this, which might be used by another claimaint?

Thanks - in fact it's already with a barrister who's is representing someone against a different bank