anyone know an update to the test case

momo1975

does anyone know if thi date is still the 19th?

Nathan_Spleen wrote: »

Who are ''they'' ?

If you're referring to the Supreme Court, 'they' didn't say October or indeed give any indication whatsoever as to when judgment was expected to be handed down. October was only ever an assumption by the media and forums.

According to the Listings Office at the Supreme Court Lord Phillips is nearing completion writing his judgment and Thursday 19 November ''may be a suitable date'' to schedule the handing down.

thriftymomma

In the last thing I read, it said we definitely wouldn't see a resolution this year. Can' recall where I was reading though.

natweststaffmember

thriftymomma wrote: »

In the last thing I read, it said we definitely wouldn't see a resolution this year. Can' recall where I was reading though.

Probably me banging my head against this incessant brick wall. The current judgement is not dealing with refunds but on whether the law applies to bank charges. We are expecting a press release this week which may or may not indicate when the first stage of the case is being dealt with.

momo1975

natweststaffmember wrote: »

Probably me banging my head against this incessant brick wall. The current judgement is not dealing with refunds but on whether the law applies to bank charges. We are expecting a press release this week which may or may not indicate when the first stage of the case is being dealt with.

Hi,
i am aware of that but surly if the fees are deemed as unlawful then it certainty paves the way for the banks to start the process cause it means they have lost, the only thing then to determine is what is and what is not fair in the way of what should be charged as fair?

natweststaffmember

momo1975 wrote: »

Hi,
i am aware of that but surly if the fees are deemed as unlawful then it certainty paves the way for the banks to start the process cause it means they have lost, the only thing then to determine is what is and what is not fair in the way of what should be charged as fair?

They aren't ruling on whether the charges are unlawful. They are answering the question "Are the terms that cause the bank charges assessable for fairness rules under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999?".
They are not answering which terms are fair or unfair, they are not answering the question of how far they would have to refund, they are not answering the question of restitutionary damages and they are not answering the question of whether the charges are fair, unfair or unlawful.

simon_templar_2

You must be sick of repeating this by now!!

natweststaffmember

simon_templar wrote: »

You must be sick of repeating this by now!!

Not yet but slowly getting there and might need a builder for the wall my head keeps banging against