The government can now order the banks to drop OFT case Appeal & return all charges

natweststaffmember

dzug1 wrote: »

Well regardless of whether it can or can't, it may not actually WANT to. It could equally well order the OFT to shut up about bank charges.

Then its back to civil litigation about bank charges and the merry go round starts again.

Head-Out-Of-Sand

JamieD wrote: »

...not sure how the judge could profit. Unless he's had a lot of overdraft charges, of course

:rotfl:

If judges could run up charges on what they're earning, there's no hope for the rest of us!!

MoneyMiser

This is a bit of dreaming rather than reality so dont go biting my head off Nathan Spleen

Why cant the government step in and stop the court case and tell the banks to refund all charges?

The court case is going to go on for years as the banks will continue with appeal after appeal after appeal. A combination of the banks and the government have nearly killed this country so why cant they raise their hands up and say 'ok, we f*#k£d up, we'll refund all charges and start again with the building of our economy'

New charges can then be rolled out accross all banks and made public knowledge so that everyone knows what they are and how much, if anyone incurrs charges its their own fault and no one can ever challenge the charges again.

As it stands, people will continue to struggle with financial hardship. People who are benifitting from interest rate cuts are saving the money for a rainy day so it isn't benefiting the economy.

Plus, if the government did this then they would be extremely popular and possibly have a chance of getting re-elected next year

Like I said just a dream :A

MM

Nathan_Spleen

I wouldn't be so sure that would make the government ''extremely popular''. Only about 20% of people incur charges and most of the other 80% will complain that it will end their 'free banking'.

The op bases his theory on the government using it's powers as a shareholder in 'the banks' but seemingly fails to grasp that most of the banks don't have any government shareholding. Also the shareholding is only temporary so what's to stop those banks bringing in charges again when those shares return to the private sector?

This is why we need legal clarity. Not so much for the refunding of past charges but to prevent the banks from charging anything more than a few quid in the future.

Yes it's frustrating.

Yes it's going to take years.

Yes people are suffering hardship in the meantime.

But the bigger picture is that it'll be settled for good.

artha

Nathan_Spleen wrote: »

Not half as hilarious as ''The government can now order the banks to drop OFT case appeal & return all charges''.

On a scale of 0 to 10, what do you think the chances of this happening is? I'd genuinely be interested to know.

Sorry to naively butt into this informed debate but if enough people wrote to their MP surely it would have some effect? I shall be retiring soon and probably becoming a Victor Meldrew but I am starting to feel a lot of empathy with him. He is actually right at times- society has forgotten how to use its teeth

oldwiring

artha wrote: »

Sorry to naively butt into this informed debate but if enough people wrote to their MP surely it would have some effect? I shall be retiring soon and probably becoming a Victor Meldrew but I am starting to feel a lot of empathy with him. He is actually right at times- society has forgotten how to use its teeth

Would that be so seeing what was posted earlier?
[quote=Nathan_Spleen;18856029....._Only_about_20%_of_people_incur_charges_and_most_of_the_other_80%_will_complain_that_it_will_end_their_'free_banking'.....[/quote]
Society might use its teeth , but not in claimants' favour.

sabretoothtigger

simon_templar wrote: »

When they say 'the banks' please remember there are some banks who have not written off toxic debts and have not used any govt handouts.

Even hsbc has written off some toxic debts, they did that in 2007 if I remember right.

They have all used some government scheme or another afaik for the purpose of liquidity

olly300

oldwiring wrote: »

Would that be so seeing what was posted earlier?

Society might use its teeth , but not in claimants' favour.

If you all think bank charges are unfair then maybe you want the system to become one where you can't go overdrawn without a pre-arranged overdraft , and go along the lines of the States where it's an offence to write a cheque that you don't have enough funds in your account to honour, for all payments.

natweststaffmember

olly300 wrote: »

If you all think bank charges are unfair then maybe you want the system to become one where you can't go overdrawn without a pre-arranged overdraft , and go along the lines of the States where it's an offence to write a cheque that you don't have enough funds in your account to honour, for all payments.

Its not the point. Banks should be able to charge for things, but it is the amount of that charge that dictates the view of whether you think it is fair. I think bank charges are unfair because of the amount charged and not because banks have charges.

Smasher

olly300 wrote: »

If you all think bank charges are unfair then maybe you want the system to become one where you can't go overdrawn without a pre-arranged overdraft

Yes please! Try writing to your bank & asking them to do just that. They simply won't!