Overdraft charges

david.l_4

Just a thought but I see all these people getting loans and credit card balances written of due to unenforceable credit agreement (mainly due to the lender not being able to find the original signed agreement) and it made me think why cant this process be used for bank accounts and the ridicules fees.

Just for a example the bank says you agreed to the terms when you signed up for the account you say you never

Outcome 1: the bank cant find the original contract

Outcome 2: they find it and low and behold it would probably say penalty fees, not fees to subsidise in credit accounts .misold?

david.l_4

And again say I wrote to the bank saying that in light of the supreme court test case I am now under the impression I pay penalty fees to cross subsidise in credit accounts I never agreed to this please show me where I have agreed bla bla……..
Anyone think this has any chance?

ILW

None whatsoever.

natweststaffmember

david.l wrote: »

And again say I wrote to the bank saying that in light of the supreme court test case I am now under the impression I pay penalty fees to cross subsidise in credit accounts I never agreed to this please show me where I have agreed bla bla……..
Anyone think this has any chance?

Cross subsidy argument in the context of the OFT test case was an avenue that the Supreme Court did leave open but that was based on a collective challenge on the charges which as we know was lost. Individual arguments cannot argue cross subsidy because UTCCR 1999 is an individual contract between you and the bank and not between you, me, ILW, et al and the banks.