Bank Charges case upheld

alemted

Perhaps the bank saw a flaw in his arguments??

Maybe he only argued the legality of the banks charges and did not mention the actual cost difference of the services provided by the bank which in reality cost the banks about £2 - £4.50 (according to recent studies), yet they charge £25 - £35+

Doesn't put me off my claim which is in for a directions hearing in june (against Lloyds TSB as well, taken 6 months so far).

Cue147

alemted wrote: »

Perhaps the bank saw a flaw in his arguments??

Maybe he only argued the legality of the banks charges and did not mention the actual cost difference of the services provided by the bank which in reality cost the banks about £2 - £4.50 (according to recent studies), yet they charge £25 - £35+

Doesn't put me off my claim which is in for a directions hearing in june (against Lloyds TSB as well, taken 6 months so far).

Agreed, this is what everyone argument is.

playfire1

Tozer wrote: »

No it is a very definite setback. It is to my knowledge the first time a judgment has been made - albeit by a low level court. There have not been any judgments (other than by default) against banks so it is effectively 1-0 to the banks.

This will also give the banks confidence to defend. Interestingly, the bank didn't even turn up so the defence must have been really quite convincing.

I do not agree with the view adopted above that this is PR from the banks. It is a judgment. I'm also a solicitor and in high profile cases the senior district judge will be wheeled out to hear the case. I suspect that happened here. By giving leave to appeal, the judge has recognised that there are important issues here but I wouldn't want to be the one appealing against a County Court decision in the Court of Appeal.

Undoubtedly the bank will ask for security of costs which will require the claimant to pay thousands up front. Frankly, it isn't worth it.

Sorry you are wrong. It is not 1 - 0 to the banks. Of all the thousands of defences that banks have entered into the court and subsequentely have not turned up. Claimants have still had to give their evidence before the magistrate and they have still had to approve it. 1 -0 to the bank? More like 10,000 - 1 to The people.

This is nothing to worry about

dubliner10

Not sure the implications of this but it's not good. Lloyds have won a case in Birmingham - the Judge found in their favour finding that the claimant hadn't proved that the bank charges weren't service charges.

Now I'm worried - have a court date.

Felix_the_Foccer

soolin wrote: »

Yes it is a silly thing to say if you can't prove it...

One of my jobs involves working within local courts and the behaviour and professional integrity of both paid District Judges and lay magistrates is expected to be beyond reproach and where there is any hint of problems either can be asked not to sit until allegations are fully investigated.

If you are even hinting at misconduct likely to bring the court into disrepute then you must report it immediately, otherwise making comments about accepting back handers is libel.

ok, going from your comments, would it be an idea for a number of people for a number of people from here (and elsewhere) to contact The Law Society here: http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/contactus.law

ok, admittedly I'm not a lawyer and I certainly wouldn't class myself as an 'expert' in these Bank Charges cases but it does seem that this Judge is flying on the face of all logic and law.

Edinburghlass_2

It may well have been a tongue in cheek remark, however it was posted on Martin's website and therefore he then becomes responsible for what is posted.

So please, lets leave it there or I may need to remove some posts.

As I said above, please keep to the subject as I have now removed some posts.

alemted

For those watching this thread, the bbc article has been updated with a reply from a Lloyds TSB spokesperson:

"Lloyds TSB said it was pleased with the ruling.

"It appears to acknowledge our position in respect of current account service charges," said a spokeswoman.

"The court has agreed with us that these are charges for a service and not default or penalty fees as has been argued by others," she added."

I would like to see an appeal by Mr. Berwick - surely he will get lots of legal/monetary help. MSEMartin has offered to help with costs.......

( I notice the banks spokeswoman didn't say "fair" charges for a service.........)

Mr_Squiddy

I am pleased with this ruling. I have always tried to manage my financial affairs properly and have paid no more than £20 in penalty fees in the last ten years. Why should I have to subsidise individuals who cannot be bothered to manage their financial affairs properly? I hope this will embolden banks to start fighting back against their irresponsible customers who think it's perfectly OK to help themselves to the bank's money without arrangement or permission.

Ernest

keeperbear wrote: »

Many people seem convinced that they will win the claim against their bank. As this verdict of this case proves, nothing is certain in the legal system. Martin has hyped everyone to challenge their bank charges, but even he does not know the proper legalities of the charges. Until further cases come to court, no one can know for sure.

As I have never paid bank charges, I am more worried about how these claims may lead to the disappearance of free banking services. One of my credit cards has already re-introduced an annual charge, and I am sure other developments will follow.

For those of you claiming bank charges, I wish you luck against the money hungry banks. However, do not believe the hype-mongers trying to convince you that all claims will be successful. The same was true of endowment claims.

FREE BANKING! It is not free!!! It is being paid for! :mad:

But that is a debate for another thread. (I believe that there is already one somewhere)

maniac886

I think this win is very important IMO, as it shows that even if you take the banks to court you may still lose your case. I hope it doesn't put people off claiming but it does however show you that nothing is certain!