Why Reclaim Bank Charges

hicskis

By boomclart:
"But only under UTCCR, if you challenge under CCA or other you have a no precedence set as far as I'm aware."

Herein lies the problem - there is precedent and it is the Supreme Court Judgment. You cannot challenge the contract term based on price - as the contract term that permits a charge forms an integral part of the contract (OFT test case).

On the same basis you cannot challenge the term based on whether it is reasonable (Fair or Unfair) - because the Supreme Court has already upheld that the contract term that permits a charge forms an integral part of the contract - so therefore must be Fair.

Cleany

hicskis wrote: »

And Money - The banks are a very powerful lobby my friend.

you may want to believe that there was corruption involved in the high court ruling, but that's just idle speculation and gossip unless you have some proof?

natweststaffmember

[Deleted User] wrote:

The recent guidance from MSE clearly states the fee level can be used as part of a CCA driven claim of unfair charges:

• Fairness can ALSO be about price
  The big advantage of looking at fairness under the CCA is it can also look at whether the price of a charge is fair. The original test case fell simply because the Supreme Court ruled that price couldn’t be looked at under the UTCCR regulations – yet that doesn’t apply here.
  Therefore you can argue that the cost of charges are disproportionate to the service provided in other words the “they charge £35 for a letter, but it only costs them £2” argument.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/oft-bank-charges

The OFT cannot argue CCA route since that is about individual consumers. They argued price or level of the charges based on UTCCR 1999. To clarify further, you cannot argue level of charges with regards to fairness under UTCCR 1999, regulation 5(1) and they grey list point (e) is not valid as it is about price/level of the charges.

natweststaffmember

Cleany wrote: »

you may want to believe that there was corruption involved in the high court ruling, but that's just idle speculation and gossip unless you have some proof?

Money buys you a pretty decent QC as well .

Sumpton QC is predicted to become a judge of the Supreme Court in the near future so he is pretty good value for money.

[Deleted User]

natweststaffmember wrote: »

The OFT cannot argue CCA route since that is about individual consumers. They argued price or level of the charges based on UTCCR 1999. To clarify further, you cannot argue level of charges with regards to fairness under UTCCR 1999, regulation 5(1) and they grey list point (e) is not valid as it is about price/level of the charges.

Yes... So you can still question the level of fee as an individual under CCA, the OFT is not of concern anymore as they have already dismissed any power to help under the CCA.

hicskis

By Cleany:
"you may want to believe that there was corruption involved in the high court ruling, but that's just idle speculation and gossip unless you have some proof?"

Did i say that? But if you want proof you have to look no further than our Member's of Parliament...(expenses and all that).

chipbeck

hicskis wrote: »

Did i say that? But if you want proof you have to look no further than our Member's of Parliament...(expenses and all that).

That's not corruption hicskis it's just fiddling.

hicskis

Ah - but fiddling is corrupt.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/corrupt

natweststaffmember

[Deleted User] wrote:

Yes... So you can still question the level of fee as an individual under CCA, the OFT is not of concern anymore as they have already dismissed any power to help under the CCA.

The OFT gave up the collective challenge but did clarify some points of law re penalties. They are working with consumer groups on current charging structure since the OFT still have concerns with the PCA market around the way charges work. Historic charges is not really a concern to the OFT but the way that banks charge currently would be albeit not from a collective challenge which is the key to understanding their decision not to pursue it further. It will be interesting how the CCA arguments are interpreted by the courts but I would still say that the endgame, eventually will be a further Test Case on the issue but I doubt the OFT would be at the forefront this time.

[Deleted User]

I agree Nat, it's going top be interesting seeing cases slowly play out in court under some of the arguments as such.