Taking The Fight Back

davidgmmafan

Is there some European law which bans this?

I totally agree changes to the law only apply to the future but this does not always apply. For example with MP's expenses they were acting within the rules at the time, but they were so out of line that position simply isn't good enough. Now I know in most cases MP's isn't a criminal matter (it should be IMO but that's a whole other story), but I think its a useful analogy.

Everybody knows the banks are charging more than it costs them, and at the outside they denied this. I wish there were some way to challenge them on THAT.

hicskis

By davidgmmafan:
"I totally agree changes to the law only apply to the future but this does not always apply."

That's why i've spent alot of time on this particulay issue. If i can get people to realise that financial institutions have agreed amongst themselves (colluded) to not report true borrowings to the CRAs, as an industry (cartel), and that this is anti-competitve-then these very institutions could be punished in the form of fines by the FSA (Financial Services Autnority).

A kind of back tax. In other words the banks take from us, the Government takes from the banks, and gives back to us in the form of roads, schools, hospitals etc

hicskis

How about this esmerellda?

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/uk/cases/UKIT/1991/DA90_25498.html&query=inaccurate+and+credit+and+file&method=boolean

hicskis

The paragraphs below are paras 51 & 52 from the judgment linked in the post above -

1. The word "fairly" in the first principle is not defined in the Act, and no guidance is given as to its interpretation. In determining its meaning we must have regard to the purpose of the Data Protection Act. It is quite clear, from the Act as a whole and in particular from the data protection principles set out in Schedule 1, that the purpose of the Act is to protect the rights of the individual about whom data is obtained, stored, processed or supplied, rather than those of the data user. The Act was the result of concerns about the use of computer data, concerns voiced in Parliament and in the reports of a number of representative official committees and widely held throughout Europe (hence the Council of Europe's Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data opened for signature on 28 January 1981 referred to in sections 37 and 41 of the Act).
2. In our view, in deciding whether the processing we have described is fair we must give the first and paramount consideration to the interests of the applicant for credit – the "data subject" in the Act's terms. We are not ignoring the consequences for the credit industry of a finding of unfairness, and we sympathise with their problems, but we believe that they will accept that they must carry on their activities in accordance with the principles laid down in the Act of Parliament.

hicskis

By concerned43:

"Bank Charges - Bank of Scotland must prove fairness in Court
THE BANK OF SCOTLAND has failed in its attempt to prevent a customer amending her claim for unfair bank charges, recalling the sist [stay or suspension of claim], and fixing a full evidential hearing at Glasgow Sheriff Court this morning (Friday, 19 February 2010). [full evidential hearing scheduled for 11th June 2010]

Interesting case - please see govan law centre site"

http://govanlc.blogspot.com/

Rico6.9

That guy in Scotland is probably glad now that he didn't buy that house in Spain!

Actually extremely !!!!ed off that I'm still rotting in Scotland while waiting for reparation to buy there. 7 years waiting so far....

hicskis

Sorry to here that....When's your case back in the courts? It is the appeal hearing - yes?

Rico6.9

Appeal was heard in Jan/Feb this year. I hope the judgement will be out before the end of March but anytime before November would be an improvement on the last one.