A Glimmer of Hope After the Supreme Court Decision

GuidoT

When the Supreme Court handed down the judgement that kind of put an end to bank charge claiming, the door was left open to properly argue regulation 5 of the UTCCR (that the OFT failed to do).

In Sharp v BOS and Reid v Clydesdale Bank, the claimants have obtained Legal Aid to determine if the charges are unfair and can put regulation 5 (and some other arguments) to the test.

I realise that the outcome in this matter will not be binding, but who knows it may lead to something binding. This is probably the first real steps I have seen taking to this forward post the Supreme Court decision.

Mr Dailly of the Govan Law Centre has fought hard to get this far - more here.

Alpine_Star

GuidoT wrote: »

In Sharp v BOS and Reid v Clydesdale Bank, the claimants have obtained Legal Aid to determine if the charges are unfair and can put regulation 5 (and some other arguments) to the test.

To be clear, the cases are not about the fairness of the charges but the fairness of the contractual relationship (CCA 140) and the balance of the parties rights and obligations (UTCCR 5.1).

GuidoT

For those that are interested in the detail, this is the basis upon which the matter will be argued from the Govan law site from about a year ago.

Mike Dailly, Principal Solicitor at Govan Law Centre said:

"Over the last few weeks, UK banks have been telling one million customers that there were now no grounds to reclaim bank charges, standing November's Supreme Court's decision. Of course, the Supreme Court itself had explained that charges could still be challenged under different legal grounds, and that is what Sheriff Baird has permitted our client to do today at Glasgow Sheriff Court".

"But besides a challenge under reg. 5 of the UTCCR, the Bank of Scotland now faces a fresh challenge that charges were excessive and unfair under the Consumer Credit Act. That is a potentially devastating case for them to answer, because under this new law the onus of proof is on the bank to show that charges were fair. Given that our banks have admitted they subsidise 'free-if-in-credit banking' by squeezing more money out their poorest customers through bank charges, they will now have to defend the indefensible. And, they will have the added problem that we are asking the court to prohibit them from imposing future charges under the CCA".

Premier_2

Old news really (apart from the plaintiff now has been granted legal aid)

Here's the report from February 2010,
http://govanlc.blogspot.com/2010/02/sheriff-puts-bank-of-scotland-to-proof.html

and a later one on the same topic from June 2010
http://govanlc.blogspot.com/2010/06/bank-charges-update-from-glc.html

Please keep us informed as to if & when an actual hearing date is set.