BBC website - lawyer trying to force banks to reveal costs

David1950_2

I was interested to see that Tom Brennan is in court on Friday as I am in Derby County Court on Monday for directions regarding HSBC Unfair charges.I am claiming over £7,000 for Charges and Mis-selling of Insurance.

frenchfancy_3

Hi. I am referring to the case between NatWest and barrister Tom Brennan, which is due to be heard at the County Court, Guildford, this Friday (apologies if this is a duplication by the way, I did read a post on this subject a couple days ago but can't find it now!). Will this case force NatWest to reveal the true cost of their charges and therefore any future/ongoing claims made by individuals will be limited to the difference between that amount and the charges paid - rather than a refund of the full amount? I have a vested interest because I finally received all my back statements from NatWest last Saturday. I did write and request them on 7 March and then sent a further letter using Special Delivery,which based on my experience, seems to be the only sensible thing to do as they responded immediately. To be fair, the staff at the branch my account is held at, were perfectly nice and polite and explained about the huge backlog (he he..!). I was expecting to find a few hundred pounds worth of charges and was therefore astounded when it came to £975 incl interest. I sent the letter off yesterday requesting the refund of this amount but I am now wondering what will happen if the court case goes NatWest's way on Friday and this guy loses his claim for "exemplary charges". Or, if he does win, will that mean there is scope for even bigger claims? Perhaps it is pointless to speculate but does anyone have any views or further details about this case. Many thanks!

digp

I have thought about his case and I feel he stands a > 70% chance of success. A lot will depend though on the judge's receptiveness to a relatively recent innovation in the law of tort. If it is some fuddy duddy judge, expect this case to go the higher courts.

sixty7

All the Best for tomorrow Tom. Power to the People!

denim.demon

jules23958 wrote: »

... at long last! A solicitor with a sense of public ethics instead of just doing it for personal gain. What makes me think he will lose this one...let me see? Establishment?

I highly doubt that he has a sense of public ethics. The boy is taking a calculated risk which if he succeeds will potentially make him a lot of money, and certainally make a name for himself, so he is on a gravy train for life.

If he fails well he is pretty much stuffed, and in my experience of dealing with Barristers and Solicitors is that they are a pretty canny bunch and would not take a risk this high if they were not 99% confident of the outcome.

Nathan_Spleen

denim.demon wrote: »

I highly doubt that he has a sense of public ethics. The boy is taking a calculated risk which if he succeeds will potentially make him a lot of money, and certainally make a name for himself, so he is on a gravy train for life.

Oh ye of little faith

grimreaper

The First Bank Charges Court Hearing



On Friday 13th, Barrister Tom Brennan is taking NatWest to court over unlawful bank charges. He was charged a total of £2,500 in penalty fees when he was a law student. NatWest, clearly running scared, offered him £4,000 to settle the case out of court, but denied liability.

Brennan wasn't happy with this. He wanted an admission of liability, so he decided to pursue the case through the courts. He has added to the claim a request for exemplary damages, meaning he wants the bank to be penalised financially for its unfair behaviour.
Can he win?

At first (and maybe second) glance he appears to be reckless. At £4,000, his bank has offered him a full settlement and then some. In my view, it's highly unlikely that Brennan will receive more than £4,000, even if he is awarded exemplary damages.

Damages have to be reasonable and proportionate. Unless there is some great, forseeable loss that he has suffered, it's hard to see him getting exemplary damages of more than 50% of the total charges, or even anything like that.

It may not end in a simple decision. For starters, Brennan or NatWest could appeal. Or maybe, at the door to the court room, NatWest will offer a settlement that Brennan can't refuse.
Is Brennan lacking in judgement?

And then there's the issue of costs.

If Brennan's total claim is for more than £5,000, and the judge doesn't award him more than the £4,000 NatWest offered, Brennan will probably have to pay all the bank's legal costs from roughly the time he declined the offer.

These costs could run to tens of thousands of pounds. For Brennan this would mean bankrupcty, and bankrupts can't be barristers or solicitors.

Plus, it previously wouldn't have been possible for NatWest to recover legal costs if the total claim was for less than £5,000. However, since last year, it's now possible for the defendant, NatWest, to recover its legal costs if the claimant, Brennan, acted unreasonably. The judge may not look kindly on a man who has wasted the court's time, especially as a barrister should know what he's doing.
Is Brennan a hero?

However, Brennan may have motivation other than money. In an interview on BBC Radio 4's Money Box, he said the judge may not award costs "if he decides I am bringing this for public reasons".

It's likely, then, that Brennan is bringing this case to finally set some court precedent for other claimants. If he has drafted his plea sensibly, and I hope that he has, the court should make a ruling on penalty charges that might benefit everyone. Otherwise, it may lead to an uncertain decision.
Is he attention-seeking?

That's a possibility. It may be that he's doing this for the media attention and to further his career. Considering how much publicity he's got, that is not hard to believe either.

Is this case worth it?

It seems like a huge risk for only a very small potential gain. If the judge rules the charges are unfair, anyone who has been penalised will still need to submit claims to get their money back. Would you spend £10,000 or more when all claimants need to do is ask for the charges to be paid back?

Is Tom Brennan a hero, a self-publicist or a man who lacks judgement? I suspect the latter. Maybe we'll find out when he joins us for next week's podcast.

lavidaloca

What time is this hearing to be held please?

fkelanne

If He Loses What Does It Mean For Us That Are Claiming?

denim.demon

fkelanne wrote: »

If He Loses What Does It Mean For Us That Are Claiming?

It all depends on the exact wording of any ruling. There is a chance that he could loose because the Judge feels that the bank has made a more than generous offer, even though the charges are unreasonable, and that would be good for us, but not for him. If he looses because the Judge thinks that the charges are reasonable then we are stuffed, and so is he.

I personally don't think that he is doing anyone any favours at all, apart from himself, if he succeeds than he can market himself as a 21st century Perry Mason, and pretend to be a man of ideals and intergity but he is a barrister so those two qualities do not apply.