Bank Charges case upheld

Noz

be very careful with what accusations you make for the sake of MSE

demvaril

Noz wrote: »

be very careful with what accusations you make for the sake of MSE

I agree, although i do suspect these things will happen. I'm pretty sure that there will be a deal made somewhere to stop the banks having to pay out, just a matter of time. Money talks.

Knackered

WiseInvestor wrote: »

At last a commonsense post on this thread!!

I'm firmly with Lloyds TSB on this one - the customer broke his contract and effectively STOLE from the bank by using an unauthorised overdraft! If I miss a mortgage payment I run the risk of my house being taken off me - is that a reasonable charge or a penalty?

For all those people who go into the red without asking permission first, I think you deserve to be penalised. Meanwhile, those of us who take care of our finances (and I'm not well off by any means!) risk being charged for everyday banking services like cheques and cash withdrawals as is the case in many other countries, simply to fund those who can't be trusted to tie their own shoelaces properly!

Running a Current Account should not be taken lightly, yet many people believe they can do as they please and shouldn't be penalised for stealing.

WELL DONE LLOYDS TSB!

1) Why are you in this thread if you have such a high-and-mighty attitude?
2) Every other court and judge in the land has a different opinion, so you are wrong.

PlasticRhino

PlasticRhino wrote: »

Has anyone been in the position where they have received 2 offers from the bank but have still gone ahead with court action?

That's the position I'm in at the moment. I'm claiming £3800 from First Direct. I received an offer of £2400 which I declined and threatened them with court action. They replied with an offer of £3200 which I declined and proceeded with court action.

I've taken it as a personal vendetta against the banks and see that it's my right to expect the money they've taken from me plus interest which is why I've been so stubborn.

I have to say though I'm now a little worried since this ruling.

To the solicitors/experts reading this: In my case would the judge likely favour the banks since they have already made 2 offers in good faith which I have refused to accept? Because they were willing to co-operate and I refused to accept, does this weaken my case?

PS. Thanks to Martin and this website for all the help and support so far!

Edinburghlass wrote: »

If the bank have offered you the full amount of your claim and you have refused it because it didn't include interest, then yes you have weakened your case.

Thanks for your response. Surely though, and maybe I'm being naive about this, I am entitled by law to the statutory interest. After all the banks have benefitted from that interest.

SpendCurber

Edited - Sorry Couldnt Find Original Post.

stavros_2

PlasticRhino wrote: »

To the solicitors/experts reading this: In my case would the judge likely favour the banks since they have already made 2 offers in good faith which I have refused to accept? Because they were willing to co-operate and I refused to accept, does this weaken my case?

It should not affect the judgment. It may however impact on the costs order the judge makes; on the small claims track these include (among others):

... such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably

Note:

A party's rejection of an offer in settlement will not of itself constitute unreasonable behaviour under [the paragraph above] but the court may take it into consideration when it is applying the unreasonableness test.

lil_elvis2000

Tis interesting. I received the settlement offer with Halifax - the goodwill offer. But I felt it prevented me from any future claims with them. I'm on low income and on tax credits, but still (for reasons I shall not get into) have the occaison where I exceed my overdraught. and I think in the future I probably will exceed it occaisionally.

I sent a refusal letter to them, and have not received a reply in three weeks. So have decided to go to court to recover my funds. Now I'm wondering if I should. Its a small amount, < £200. I want to go for it.

AlexisV

I'm firmly with Lloyds TSB on this one - the customer broke his contract

A contract is overruled by the law, which states that penalties must be in proportion to costs incurred. Whether you agree or disagree with the law is irrelevant.

The judge is just a man and on this occasion he got it wrong. His ruling contradicts the laws of the land.

PlasticRhino

stavros wrote: »

Note:
A party's rejection of an offer in settlement will not of itself constitute unreasonable behaviour under [the paragraph above] but the court may take it into consideration when it is applying the unreasonableness test.

Thanks for the response Stavros.

Akita*2007

HI
I HAVE NOTICED THAT LLOYDS HAVE WON A CASE NOT TO PAY OUT :eek: , I HAVE ONLY JUST STARTED MY CLAIM 3 WEEKS AGO WITH NATIONWIDE TO ASK FOR MY STATMENTS BUT GUESS WHAT STILL NO REPLY (I KNOW THAY HAVE IT BECAUSE I SENT IT RECORDED).
SO WHAT HAPPENDS NOW DO YOU THINK, ARE ALL BANKS GOING TO FOLLOW WHAT LLOYDS HAVE DONE, IF YOU WANT TO READ ABOUT IT AND YOU ARE ON AOL ITS ON THEIR DALY NEWS BORD,
THE JUDEGE IS SAYING THAT THE PERSON WHO IS ASKING FOR HIS BANK CHARGES NEW THAT THEIR WAS A PENNALTY, AND HE SIGNED THE CONTRACT SAYING THAT HE UNDERSTOOD WHEN HE OPEN THE ACCOUNT
SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN NOW?

GOOD LUCK TO PEOPLE WHO ARE STILL GOING TROUGH WITH THIS.
WE ALL NEED TO STAND UP FOR OUR RIGHTS ON THIS ONE AND NOT LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT , AS THIS IS OUR MONEY NOT THEIRS TO MAKE THEM RICHER

:A