Massive victory for Bank Charge reclaiming News Article Discussion

Tozer

arigney wrote: »

I think you are wrong, there is no way that the old boys club will not kick into action if the banks go down this path.

Is that based on your experience of the Appellate Courts in the UK or conspiracy theory??????

arigney

Tozer wrote: »

Can I suggest you keep this on-topic?

And as for the Peer who "got off almost scott free" I believe he was actually given a custodial sentence.....

If that had of been you or I it would have been much longer. He should be now kicked out of house for being a common criminal. But we both know that will not happen.. boys club!

arigney

Tozer, do you work for a bank as you seen to be on the defensive. There are many people who don't trust MPs or Lords, why can you not understand this after the amount of sleeze we see at these levels in the media almost daily?

Tozer

arigney wrote: »

If that had of been you or I it would have been much longer. He should be now kicked out of house for being a common criminal. But we both know that will not happen.. boys club!

Again you are factually wrong. Peers are now kicked out of the House of Lords if convicted of certain types of offences.

Get with the 21st Century!

Tozer

arigney wrote: »

Tozer, do you work for a bank as you seen to be on the defensive. There are many people who don't trust MPs or Lords, why can you not understand this after the amount of sleeze we see at these levels in the media almost daily?

No I am a lawyer. If you actually took the time to look, you would see that I frequently give non-opinionated advice on this board to claimants.

I'm not on the defensive. Personally, I think a lot of people should take more responsibility in respect of bank charges. That said, I think the decision in law is right.

You seem to be getting yourself mixed up with "Lords" who are politicians and the HL as an Appeal Court.

arigney

Certain types of offfences - but not all! Very handy for them..

You are right and I am wrong? IN YOUR OPPINION

Sounds to me like you are here to convert to your own oppinion.

marcharrison1979

lizbob wrote: »

the government aren't actually "helping" the banks, they are simply trying to prevent what happened with the iclandic bank happening to our banks, namely consumers losing their money without any chance of getting it back. many people are looking at this too simplistically. the banks are not a mate who's broke so your giving them money, it's someone who has lost the money he was looking after for a load of children, yes it's bad he lost it but shouldn't we at least ensure the children still get their money? if in addition to this he'd also stolen some money from those children then you would find proof it had been stolen and regardless of his problems you would expect him to give it back!

crude analogy but you get the point.

very well put. I fully understand why the government is doing this, and i am all for it. I think that all banks should be state owned and the profits they make should be spent on the NHS and other public services like that. No more silly bonuses! bankers get paid enough already, the fact that you've got to offer performance related bonuses speaks volumes to me, it basically proves that in order to do their jobs properly they need a bonus. They should be fully committed to hitting targets regardless of a bonus, because it's their job! it makes me angry, i need a drink.

arigney

I am not mixed up, I can tell the difference between right and wrong and I know that there is corruption at every level in public service and non public services.

As a lawyer I now understand why you are defensive I am attacking the system that you are a part of, I am saying that the system can be abused and you must know that in your position, youmust see it happen daily. I do not think that people who are in debt are faultless but the banks act like vultures swooping when people are down on thier luck and I think that the law should protect them. I think that there we agree.

jay3_2

arigney wrote: »

I am not mixed up, I can tell the difference between right and wrong and I know that there is corruption at every level in public service and non public services.

As a lawyer I now understand why you are defensive I am attacking the system that you are a part of, I am saying that the system can be abused and you must know that in your position, youmust see it happen daily. I do not think that people who are in debt are faultless but the banks act like vultures swooping when people are down on thier luck and I think that the law should protect them. I think that there we agree.

Well I'm not a lawyer, but I agree 100% with Tozer. Your cynical comments regarding our judicial system and public service are unfounded, and you haven't provided a shred of evidence to support them.

arigney

Watch the news then!