Bank Charges Reclaiming Guide discussion

alliballi

Hi

I always read with interest these threads, I have my first prelim hearing for reclaiming bank charges at end of the month in court, so will keep posted of what happens, as I cant seem to find any info on here about what will happen, fingers crossed

Premier_2

alliballi wrote: »

Hi

I always read with interest these threads, I have my first prelim hearing for reclaiming bank charges at end of the month in court, so will keep posted of what happens, as I cant seem to find any info on here about what will happen, fingers crossed

A preliminary hearing occurs when a judge wishes to discuss/clarify some issues prior to a full hearing.
e.g. the judge may wish to better understand if there really is any legal basis for the claim or perhaps better understand a defence.

I once summonsed someone and their initial defence was "I totally deny the claim". The judge said that was not a defence, but simply a denial, and so asked a few questions of them. When it became apparent there were some areas specific areas of dispute, then the judge ordered that the defendant within 14 days submit a full and proper defence ... seeking legal independant advice if required to be able to do so. (They did that and the revised defence came to about 30 pages, double spaced, so about 15 otherwise)

It is sometimes possible for a judge to make a decision at the the pre-hearing, so go prepared to justify your claim. e.g. in the above case, if the defendant hadn't been able to expand on why he didn't agree with my claim, then the judge would probably have simply awarded me judgement there & then.
The judge also ordered that the case be transfered to another court since he didn't agree with the defendant that it should be held in his court ... it wasn't the defendant's local court and he couldn't justify to the satisfaction of the judge why he wanted it held in that court. The judge asked me as the claimant where I wanted the case heard, and as I said I would obviously prefer it in my local court, that was what he then ordered. (That was a case between two individuals and protocol usually dictates it is held in the defendant's local court)

In some cases, the judge may decide having better understood the issues, that no hearing is actually required, since he will base judgement on the written evidence supplied. Should that be the case, you will be notified of such intention, but should either side object, then the matter will go to a full hearing.

It could even simply be that the judge needs to better understand the number of issues involved so as to better decide on the amount of time required to hear the case in full.

Please, as you promised, let us know how you get on, specifically what the judge wanted clarifying at the pre-hearing in your case.

alliballi

Many thanks premier for an informative post, I dont need to attend this hearing my lawyer will be there, so not sure if it is to argue the point about the banks proving the charges and us changing the wording if you know what I mean I cant mind what its called sorry, I might go to do my nosey, I will keep posted to see what happens, probably my luck it will be thrown out, we will see, date is 28/5 so not too long

nb17279

Can someone please help me...
I wrote to my bank last year asking to reclaim my bank charges and it was put on hold due to the court hearing

In january this year they wrote to me saying i couldnt claim my charges back and so i threw away all my paper work i had for my claim.

I now know i maybe able to claim them back how should i proceed?
Im not sure how much my original figure i was claiming was?

Can someone please help me

Many Thanks

natweststaffmember

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?p=158125#post158125

This is the legal opinion of Anthony Scrivener, QC for Legal Beagles giving the chances of success on the new arguments as relatively low since the Supreme Court decision was flawed. Unfortunately, they are no longer challenging historic charges because the chances of success are very low. If you get the chance to read the legal opinion in full then do so but at this moment in time we will have to wait and see for others to succeed before progressing further. Such is life.

Premier_2

natweststaffmember wrote: »

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?p=158125#post158125

This is the legal opinion of Anthony Scrivener, QC for Legal Beagles giving the chances of success on the new arguments as relatively low since the Supreme Court decision was flawed. Unfortunately, they are no longer challenging historic charges because the chances of success are very low. If you get the chance to read the legal opinion in full then do so but at this moment in time we will have to wait and see for others to succeed before progressing further. Such is life.

...the chances of success for individual litigants in person - are very slim and the costs risk is far too great to justify continuance...

Sometimes its time to draw a line and move on. That is what we are now doing, and we would encourage others to do the same.

Enjoy the performance. I am led to believe she has a superb voice

natweststaffmember

Premier wrote: »

Enjoy the performance. I am led to believe she has a superb voice

Premier, have you read the legal opinion? Are you aware of Govan Law Centre?

http://govanlc.blogspot.com/2010/02/sheriff-puts-bank-of-scotland-to-proof.html

In case you missed the news with regards to a full evidential case due in 28 days time. The fact Legal Beagles have withdrawn from advising claimants to go through the court route, there are indeed other cases still doing so....
Furthermore, there is consumer action group and MSE and Penalty charges forum who have yet to advise their usership to withdraw from claims so, at the moment, Subo, has not risen to sing quite yet
Next time you start rejoicing, make sure everyone has been given the same hymn sheet cos I wasn't given the same one.

Have you read the legal opinion yourself(merely out of interest rather than anything else)?

tink660_2

Hi all,

We have a BOS bus account which a couple of years ago we had a refund of charges (approx one third) of what we were asking for - but accepted because of the financial position we were in at the time. Since we have had a lot more charges applied and would like to claim these back. The stance of the BOS is that even if you went one penny over they will charge you £35.00 and if you had say three outgoings of £10.00 each but there was money in the account to cover 2 of the payments they would not pay all of the outgoings and charge £105.00 (3 times £35). I am going to write a letter requesting the charges back and if this fails I will contact the FOS about the disproportionate charges.

Premier_2

tink660 wrote: »

...we had a refund of charges (approx one third) of what we were asking for - but accepted because of the financial position we were in at the time. Since we have had a lot more charges applied and would like to claim these back....
I am going to write a letter requesting the charges back and if this fails I will contact the FOS about the disproportionate charges.

I would draw your attention to the MSE article on reclaiming bank charges that says specifically in regards to contacting the FOS about disproportionate charges

The FOS stresses these cases are not "black and white" and those who continually slip over their limit, not in hardship, are not guaranteed to be successful.

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

... but best of luck in your attempts; hopefully you won't need to escalate the matter to the FOS.

natweststaffmember

Premier, have you read the legal opinion yet?

Are you aware of the Govan Law Centre case next month?

Thanks in advance of your response.....a simple yes or no would suffice