OFT and Banks to decide on "fair charge"

Nathan_Spleen

angelcake wrote: »

But surely this is a straight case! The banks are charging 'unlawfully' therefore the case shouldn't take long! They should admit defeat and do the honest thing! They shouldn't be allowed to do this. If one bank, say Lloydstsb backed down and changed its proposals to be more customer friendly (it is our money after all) they will benefit in the long run as they would get more customers and 'look' better.... They should at least offer to refund half, if not more, of the charges! they are going to have to sooner or later so why not now and look the 'better bank' ... Or am I going along the wrong road?

You can rest assured that the banks will make this as complicated as it can possibly get. And the OFT for that matter

Bernard_Coleslaw

RBS are involved in this - it was announced they'd joined the case this morning.

Regardless, the FSA have allowed all banks, whether involved in the case or not, to suspend claims. The view taken is that the case is one that affects the entire industry, not just those who've brought the case to court.

lindilou39

Am afraid as Law stands....only those that have paid their fee and claimed will not come under the Limitations Act 1980....if you havent claimed through court then yes you are bound by the Act.

angelcake

The reason I asked is a lot of people seem to be confused as to what to do.

I copied what nick said from another thread here:

Your dilemma is as follows:

You could pay the court fee and most likely (although not certainly) either the bank or the judge will have the claim stayed.
This means you will need to wait until the outcome of the test case is known. At the moment various timescales are being thrown around from a few months to a year as to when this may be heard.
It will then depend on the result of the case what if any money you then get back.

If you don't file the claim, you may lose out depending on the ruling in the test case. They might decide a timescale or that only claims already filed are eligible. Obviously if the decision goes against the OFT, you would not have wasted the court fee.

With the limited information currently available, it's a very tough decision. I think if I was reclaiming a large amount and I could afford the court fee, I would file a claim. If it was a small claim, I would probably not bother. This is just my thoughts at the moment and as more is revealed, there might be a clearer guide.

I suppose it must be a choice we will have to make, I think I will go ahead, I would be gutted to have waited any longer and somehow it happens to not let us have any charges back. There is no Yes or No answer then! Not that simple

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

natweststaffmember

Claims that are already out there will still be honoured, ie if they said they would make an offer then they will. However, newer claims from today will get the letter that no cases will be dealt with until the test case is heard and the verdict revealed.

superdad_3

After listening to the Channel 4 news video, regarding taking this test case to court on this website, i am maddened by this immediate decision to stop any claims going ahead till after this test case is heard.

Surely though, these banks have already set a president by settling so many cases alike already out of court.

I as a customer in the midst of trying to reclaim my charges,at the stage of taking the bank to court and now been told will be suspended angers me to think that all customers in my position are put on hold in receiving what is rightfully ours back from the banks.

How can this test case be fair ?

If banks have refused up until now to pursue these claims in court they have obliviously had something to cover up or hide.
Are these other individual cases which have been settled outside of court going to be reassessed if the court rules in favor of charges being fair, as all the cases which have been settled, should not have been settled at all. if thats the case why weren't the banks quick enough to pursue each individual claim through the courts in the beginning.

Referring back to Channel 4 news video:-

The only reason this has happened, is down to one issue that the banks have realized this is going to cost billions to repay what is owed.

The mention of banks having to repay back excessive amounts of money to customers who have been unfairly charged, should not come into the equation seen as they were quick enough to take our money in the first place, so they are not outlaying money from their own pockets but from the pockets of which were lined by all the customers unfairly charged.


I feel a sweeping effect coming on,
This is going to be swept under the carpet, by way of backhanders being paid and many dodgy deals.

Stokey125

In view of the multiple threads on this matter I think it is worth making a couple of points


1 While the banks would have been aware from pre issue corrspondence that the OFT was going to start the action until the papers where ready for issuing nothing could be said as everyone would look stupid if the Claim was not issued. As technically Martin is not a party to the action there is an argument for saying that there was no need to inform him. However as it seems that the impression was given that he was informed he should have been or at any rate the impression that he had been should not have been given that he had.

2 As I have said on one thread the issuing of teh Claim by the OFT does not have the effect of suspending all existing cases. Until such time that either an Order is made by the Court, either on application or of its own motion to stay claims, or the Lord Chief Justice or possibly the Master of the Rolls issues a direction to the Courts staying every claim they continue and all court hearings will go ahead.

3 On the question of timing as the Long Vacation starts on Wednesday the only way you will get any hearing before October is if one of the Barristers involved agrees that it is fit to be heard during vacation.

4 On the last occassion that the OFT bought a Test Case they lost at Trial but one on appeal. As far as I can recall that case is still pending in the House of Lords so this matter is unlikely to finish within a year unless it is expedited.




Michael

natweststaffmember

It is likely the bank will ask for the case to be put on hold, you can contest it and if the judge does agree then you win before it all is decided. However, remember the 8% interest that you can claim through the courts, that will add up everyday that the claim is on hold.

natweststaffmember

I will bump this up as it does sound quite interesting.

Stokey125

cragdoo wrote: »

Silly question , but I'll ask any way .

Is this case been heard under English law ? If so how will it affect us here in Scotland ?

As the matter is being heard in the High Court in London any ruling will not apply in Scotland as it is a different jurisdiction and therefore an action will have to be bought in the Scottish Courts.