Resetting Claims

Nightranger

Apologies if this information is on a different thread but I have not been able to find it. The loss of the recent test case had Lloyds TSB stating that they would rejecy all claims with immediate effect. Does this mean that all claims will have to be resubmitted pending a further legal challenge? If so, surely this will mean the claims will be reset to zero time and (in my case) two years will now be lost and beyond claim?

esmerellda

Lloyds backed down a little after some press coverage of their intention to dismiss claims, so as things stand everything is on hold the same as before the judgment. We're awaiting something from the OFT and the MOJ on the next steps and things should be clearer within the next week.

Premier_2

Nightranger wrote: »

Apologies if this information is on a different thread but I have not been able to find it. The loss of the recent test case had Lloyds TSB stating that they would rejecy all claims with immediate effect. Does this mean that all claims will have to be resubmitted pending a further legal challenge? If so, surely this will mean the claims will be reset to zero time and (in my case) two years will now be lost and beyond claim?

Q. My case is on hold with the courts, what is going to happen?

A. ...
If your case is based on the old template letters and the court deals with it, it's very likely to be struck out...


Q. How likely is it I will get my money back?

A. Much less likely than prior to the result, but not impossible. Still, the best thing to do is plan for getting nothing, but cross your fingers.

As we know many people would like a 'what's the chance' type answer, our instinctive guess is even with the new argument there is only a 10-20% chance of most people now getting charges back.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/reclaim/2009/11/bank-charges-qa-door-reopened-for-reclaimers

Premier_2

LLoyds haven't exactly backed down, just clarified that although they intend to apply to the courts to have the cases struck out, they haven't done so yet as they will "only be doing so as part of an industry-wide activity in conjunction with other banks."

"A spokesman for the FOS said: ...'Unfortunately, the vast majority of claims will not be successful following the Supreme Court announcement.' "

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/savings-and-banking/ask-an-expert/article.html?in_article_id=495145&in_page_id=111&position=moretopstories

...the Judicial Communications Office said that each case would be considered on its merits by County Court judges.
The brutal truth though seems to be that the claims for refunds of past charges, whether at the banks, in the courts or with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) are dead in the water.
"That is the end of it," a barrister who specialises in banking told the BBC.
"All these actions will be struck out - there is no basis for them as currently constituted." ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8378481.stm

Nightranger

Nightranger wrote: »

Apologies if this information is on a different thread but I have not been able to find it. The loss of the recent test case had Lloyds TSB stating that they would rejecy all claims with immediate effect. Does this mean that all claims will have to be resubmitted pending a further legal challenge? If so, surely this will mean the claims will be reset to zero time and (in my case) two years will now be lost and beyond claim?

As you may know from other threads, banks are now sending out letters stating the test case interpretation and rulling. Although the banks may not be dismissing the cases (at least, not yet) they are trying to do what I suspected in this post - trying to re-set claims. It is a bit complicated but it is down to the six-year rule so that we could not claim charges back from more than six years of submitting the claim. The letters being sent out usually say something like 'if we have not heard from you by blah blah we will close the case'. I assume we have to write again to keep the case open or any re-submission will be re-set to zero date?

Incidentally, the letter also sets out the banks interpretation of the test case interpretation, which basically suggests one can do what one likes as long as you tell another person clearly. This surely has some interesting ramifications in law if it is true.

natweststaffmember

Under UTCCR 1999, a term that is unfair is unenforceable in its entirety so the Limitations Act may well not apply.

They have said that you cannot challenge the level of charges which is correct.

Nightranger

natweststaffmember wrote: »

Under UTCCR 1999, a term that is unfair is unenforceable in its entirety so the Limitations Act may well not apply.

They have said that you cannot challenge the level of charges which is correct.

Thanks for that. However, it certainly is not the way Lloyds TSB have worded the letter and it would be interesting to know the wording that other people receive. I will post the full text at some point but it will take time because I will have to re-type it rather than scan the document to avoid copyright rules.

natweststaffmember

Nightranger wrote: »

Thanks for that. However, it certainly is not the way Lloyds TSB have worded the letter and it would be interesting to know the wording that other people receive. I will post the full text at some point but it will take time because I will have to re-type it rather than scan the document to avoid copyright rules.

I think there are scanned copies here on MSE, on Legal beagles, and on penalty charges site as well