BBC website - lawyer trying to force banks to reveal costs

Lorne

Good evening everyone,

I've just read on bbc.co.uk that this coming Friday a lawyer is taking his bank to court about bank charges he experienced as a student, it is the first case to go to court. Good luck to him!

I was wondering if anyone had any advice about whether the ruling on Friday either for or against the bank will change the claim process and whether I should continue with my 3rd letters this week or leave it until next week?

Thanks, L

Leebcoward

We shall see if the bank turns up in court, If they do the judge is sure to order disclosure of actual costs for running delinquent accounts....They wont want to tell the world it cost £2.00 (estimate on my part) when they charge up to £35.00 for a failed DD. I bet they dont show unless they have a red hot defence that relates to this claim only. We shall see.

Lorne

Thanks Lee.

I hope that this man does really well with his claim, on the bbc news site he talks about being bankrupt if the decision does not go his way. It is a lot to risk

digp

halloweenqueen wrote: »

The bank of been fairly keen to avoid the court as he had about £2000 worth of charges and they made a second offer of £4000. If he loses he also loses his career as he will be disbarred, Somehow I don't think the bank is going to be able to prove it cost them £38?

It does not follow that he will be disbarred.

If (big if) he lost, and if (big if) they got costs against him, then argument about why they hired so many lawyers etc come in to play and their costs can be assessed.

This is interesting.

Twinkly

The issue of 'exemplary damages' concerns me. What damages exactly ? He has been offered an amount in excess of the charges & I assume interest and that is all any of us are able to claim for thus far in the whole procedure at court stage.

I just dont see how he can claim for 'exemplary damages' without substantial proof of same and I see no mention whatsoever in the article of exactly what those 'exemplary damages' are supposed to compensate for. I am wary that the bank is likely to target and shred this point in court and the whole issue of the unlawfulness of the charges or the disclosure of their actual cost in court is likely to be glossed over and avoided.

I'd really like to see this guys Particulars Of Claim before attempting an educated and informed opinion of the possible outcome but I look forward to friday to see what happens in court.

digp

Twinkly wrote: »

The issue of 'exemplary damages' concerns me. What damages exactly ? He has been offered an amount in excess of the charges & I assume interest and that is all any of us are able to claim for thus far in the whole procedure at court stage.

punitive or exemplary damages are there to punish NOT compensate,

I just dont see how he can claim for 'exemplary damages' without substantial proof of same and I see no mention whatsoever in the article of exactly what those 'exemplary damages' are supposed to compensate for. I am wary that the bank is likely to target and shred this point in court and the whole issue of the unlawfulness of the charges or the disclosure of their actual cost in court is likely to be glossed over and avoided.

Your ignorance of the law really shows.

I'd really like to see this guys Particulars Of Claim before attempting an educated and informed opinion of the possible outcome but I look forward to friday to see what happens in court.

The case will hinge on legal argument which should not be in the particulars as such except to the extent necesarry to plead the case.

Some info on the law of unlawful interference in economic interests can be found here: http://www.torys.com/publications/pdf/AR2001-18T.pdf

It is a fairly new tort (or civil wrong)

Nathan_Spleen

If he fails there will be no implications whatsoever. Why would there be?


http://www.tombrennan.co.uk/

katomum_2

I work for a major bank and deal exclusively with customers wanting to discuss charges on their accounts. I am also a law student and I'm in the process of claiming back charges from another bank.

The claim for exemplary damages claim is just this guys way of trying to make a name for himself in the legal field and trying to force the banks to come to court.... I think its quite likely the banks will not turn up, the judge will rule on the side of the plaintiff and again no judicial precedent will be set.

With regard to the amount it costs banks to process transactions, i doubt its even around the £2 mark, judging how the bank i work for processes these transactions i think its unlikely its more than a few pence.

Also, banks routinely give out bad info to customers when they open accounts (eg basic accounts that supposedly cant allow you to go overdrawn) and further give people with low literacy and numeracy skills debit cards and cheque books, these people are often on low incomes but incur the most charges because they find it hard understanding how to run the account....

Oh i could rant for ages but best stop.... I have a banking exam to study for!
xx

Twinkly

digp wrote: »

punitive or exemplary damages are there to punish NOT compensate,

Duly noted.

digp wrote: »

Your ignorance of the law really shows.

My confusion as to the exact nature of his claim is evident and clearly queried in my post. Your supercilious response is unwarranted and more to point it is utterly unhelpful. Lack of knowledge does not equate ignorance and your remark is quite simply insulting. There is no need.

digp wrote: »

The case will hinge on legal argument which should not be in the particulars as such except to the extent necesarry to plead the case.

Some info on the law of unlawful interference in economic interests can be found here: http://www.torys.com/publications/pdf/AR2001-18T.pdf

It is a fairly new tort (or civil wrong)

My gratitude is obviously marred by the display of your lack of common good manners. There is a little confusion for my part as to the relevance of Canadian law in the UK but it makes decent reading and gets the point across for me. For this I thank you and quite frankly it is all you needed to say in answering my post.

digp

The Canadian judges are a tad more sensible then our lot.