MSE News: Bank charges: banks win test case appeal

dchappers

Whilst I am appauled, I am not surprised. It was never realistic to expect that their ruling would come down on the side of the consumer. And had it done so, the government would have definately overturned it. The noises being made by them this morning made that very apparent.

This runs deeper than being purley a financial issue and says a lot about the way that our country is run.

Knackered

glider3560 wrote: »

What I think is disgusting, is that people think they can steal the bank's money without their permission. As an analogy, I would compare going into an unauthorised overdraft as walking into a shop, removing something from the shelf and walking out without paying. You wouldn't get away with "I don't have much money" in the shop, so why should the bank be the same? Most people on these boards are on low incomes but learn to live within their means and not steal the bank's money.

People seem to have got into their heads that it is alright to steal the bank's money without any consequences. It is not and should certainly be made illegal.

If you didn't agree with the charges, then why did you open the bank account?

Before someone says that the banks have stolen taxpayers money, they haven't. In case anyone doesn't realise, the government didn't just hand over money to the banks, but instead bought shares in the banks. This means that when the banks become more profitable again, the government will receive income in the form of dividends from the bank.

Today's decision is an excellent one and I hope that the "free banking" model will continue.

This forum is for people who are trying to reclaim money the bank has taken from them. It is NOT for people in ivory towers to saunter into, casting their pathetic judgmental gaze over everyone and patronising people with their smugness.

jonpnash

Lord Phillips stated that it might be open to question whether it is fair to subsidise some customers whose accounts always remain in credit by levies on others who experienced events they did not foresee when they opened their accounts.

Also in the press release they also say... this..

Lord Walker commented that ministers and Parliament had decided to transpose the directive
as it stood rather than to confer the higher degree of consumer protection afforded by the
national laws of some other member states. Parliament might wish to consider whether to
revisit that decision (Para 52).

In other words....
This is not the end of it. The law lords have only questioned the jurisdiction of the OFT to investigate the charges under the Unfair Contract Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. NOT THAT THE CHARGES ARE FAIR or THE CASE IS SETTLED.
They have indeed, said that they OFT can proceed with a case under different regulations.
In other words..... This is not the end... but just the beginning of round two.
Maybe this decision will galvanize support and the case against the banks. I don't think the banks can pop the champagne corks just yet..... as is not going to go away..... by this decision.

samuki

Just want to add my tuppence to this discussion.
Evidently this ruling has come as a major surprise to everyone involved. I'm sure the banks too are surprised. Were they not considering introducing charges for ATM withdrawals a couple of days ago because of the then imminent ruling? Anyway, I hope the fight carries on.
And for those who are lucky enough not to have incurred any charges and think they are fair and legitimate, correlate this with what cowboy clampers do. They can charge whatever they want, arbitrarily because you may have parked "illegally". Is that fair?
Can't wait to see how we get screwed next!

claireh2284_2

not surprised, even when we were in financial hardship hsbc refused to pay my partner the £2000 they owed him, they've screwed us over at every turning point. the government and major companies have us over a barrel with direct debits and direct payments. im absolutely heartbroken and disgusted. no justice - i cant help but think the banks paid them off. if charges dont have to be fair then neither do i **** them all. i hope they rot.

PadiP

Myrrdin wrote: »

Why should anyone expect a service for free? It is now time for DIRECT ACTION. All those who want their charges back queue on selected days (e.g. Saturday mornings) and demand - peacefully of course - their charges back.
If done persistently, en mass, this will disrupt the banking industry. Let's all now cause these banks maximum misery in any way we can.

Sounds like a brilliant idea - they'll call the police, and maybe even do something like locking the door when protestors are inside, which is technically false imprisonment (oh dear!). All the police can effectively do is ask protestors to leave, and you can bet your bottom dollar that the police would be gentle, as it's a pretty hot political potato now. I'm certainly up for this, could be lots of fun - but as the OP asserts, it must be PEACEFUL.

itsgazza_2

All major banks have a basic bank account that does not allow you to go overdrawn, therefore no bank charges.

Dont start complaining though when you do your weekly shop at tesco if your bank decline your purchases because you dont have enough money in your account!!!

superdood

euronorris wrote: »

I can't believe this! The bank charges don't have to be fair??? WHY NOT?????!!!!!!!

Can we not, as consumers and citizens of the UK, petition together to the courts about this? I know it's already been to the court but their answer is unacceptable, not to mention irresponsible!

Will we now see an increase in fees? Will they introduce new charges left, right and centre? After all, they don't have to be fair so they can do what they like.

And people wonder why I left the UK.....

The courts decision is final, you can't petition against it, no matter how many people are upset by it.

There is however such a thing as 'people power' and as we all know this is the biggest consumer uprising since the poll tax riots, people need to keep the pressure on to bring about the results that most of us want. And we have got a result in a way as banks have reduced their overdraft charges, just not giving automatic refunds en masse.

But, I would wait and see how the land lies first before taking any protest action. I can't wait to hear what Martin Lewis has to say about it once he's made sense of it all, and wait to hear off the banks about how they plan to 'resolve' things and what further action, if any, we can take. It might not be as bad as we think, let's wait and see.

Tozer

euronorris wrote: »

A lot of you on here who are always in credit and think this a good thing. Think again. Charges do not have to be fair........cue charges for anything and everything. Including your standard banking.

This is not a good thing for you either!

No, you have missed the point. This judgment relates to default charges.

sutol

The Supreme Court has not decided that the charges are fair (or unfair), only that the Office of Fair Trading has no jurisdiction to decide whether or not they are fair. Whether the charges are unfair – and can be recouped through court action – is still very much up to the county courts. This is not the panacea for the banks that people seem to think it is