The Bank's after Test Case in late June?

northerner79

So presuming that the Bank's are NOT found in favour of at the end of the June test case what are the next steps they will take to try and prevent paying out to hundreds of thousands of customers?

I have serious doubts about any of use getting any money back this year!!

carlos1973

northerner79 wrote: »

So presuming that the Bank's are NOT found in favour of at the end of the June test case what are the next steps they will take to try and prevent paying out to hundreds of thousands of customers?

I have serious doubts about any of use getting any money back this year!!

I think you've under estimated a little here.
God only knows what will happen if the banks lose again. One thing I think that should happen if this debacle continues is a 'stay' should be placed upon banks charging customers. At the moment they are just piling charge upon charge onto the people who are least able to afford it. When an aggreived customer has the audacity to question these charges and ask for them to be dropped they are often met with a point blank refusal or told to wait until the case is concluded.
Just my opinion and experience though.

natweststaffmember

northerner79 wrote: »

So presuming that the Bank's are NOT found in favour of at the end of the June test case what are the next steps they will take to try and prevent paying out to hundreds of thousands of customers?

I have serious doubts about any of use getting any money back this year!!

The decision on the appeal will not arrive in June but once it arrives either in July or October(as that will be the new session of court as it is in recess from end of july util then) we may well find out.One school of thought says that stays will be lifted. My suspicion is that until the terms have been test in court then they won't. We need to wait for the appeal and the judgement on that appeal.

Ansu

Due to the amount of claims, and that the judgement will not be retrospective, I personally do not believe that they will pay out. If true costs are revealed, the fees may not even change.

natweststaffmember

Ansu wrote: »

Due to the amount of claims, and that the judgement will not be retrospective, I personally do not believe that they will pay out. If true costs are revealed, the fees may not even change.

That is utter nonsense. If the terms falls into the UTCCR 1999 then the term is removed from the contract and any monies paid under the term HAVE to be refunded. It is retrospective regardless of anything.

Ansu

natweststaffmember wrote: »

That is utter nonsense. If the terms falls into the UTCCR 1999 then the term is removed from the contract and any monies paid under the term HAVE to be refunded. It is retrospective regardless of anything.

Isn't the case is to determine if UTCCR applies to bank charges, not whether they are unfair under UTCCR?


Although if this has changed, my apologies, I have not been following it.

simon_templar_2

Banks will possibly cherry pick who they want as customers ie those who are able to manage their account without bouncing cheques, DD's etc.

natweststaffmember

Ansu wrote: »

Isn't the case is to determine if UTCCR applies to bank charges, not whether they are unfair under UTCCR?


Although if this has changed, my apologies, I have not been following it.

The first part is whether bank charges are assessable under UTCCR(preliminary issues). If the banks were certain that they are fair then why are they appealing all the judgements since litigation would not be necessary. The Substantive Issues is to determine which terms are unfair and further litigation is likely. However, when the term or if the term is unfair then all monies taken as a result of that term has to be returned.