Stop Press - View On Oft/bank Announcement

valex

chipbeck wrote: »

Hi Badger Lady,
not a question of being noble more a case of being angry. I do see your point but I really do feel strongly about what has gone on. These banks have settled with thousands of people and are obviously sick of paying out but why should I or anybody else be treated differently. I appreciate they admit no liability etc but to me the law is an !!!, how could any reasonable person not agree that if they are paying out to some of their customers they should bite the bullet and pay us all.

I was replying to a specific question from Badger Lady who had already signed an acceptance Chip. I agree with you wholeheartedly with regard to the Banks' conduct.
With regard to Gerry's enquiry re the other Banks, the test case is being brought via the BBA and the article I referred to earlier confirms the rest of them will hide behind the action.
On a more positive note, the claims that are being made via the Courts can only be stayed by the courts, not by defendants such as the Nationwide. Keep on with the process until the courts tell you something different.:beer:

Badger_Lady

"The conditions in the waiver include dealing promptly with complaints once clarity is achieved and communicating clearly with consumers throughout the process. The FSA also expects firms to continue to help their customers avoid incurring unauthorised overdraft charges in the first instance and to continue to deal with hardship cases."

From reading that, is it meant to refer to reclaiming bank charges, or just incurring them in future?

In the context above, it sounds like they're talking about Business As Usual whereby, in the spirit of 'treating customers fairly', banks are expected to provide support in helping customers get out of debt...

In my experience this normally entails a call from their Collections department offering a temporary overdraft extension on the agreement that you will repay a set amount of money on set dates. In return for this, they don't charge high interest / penalties, thereby helping you to avoid further financial difficulty.

I'm no expert though, just guessing!

TimothyJamesButler

Well done Martin on Channel4 News.

Just to let you all know if you havn't already read what Martin has posted, you can STILL CLAIM BACK DEFAULT CHARGES ON ALL CREDIT CARDS.


I am in the process of sending out the letter to ask for my money back *after totalling up what I have been charged...

Just a hint that the banks will probably try to throw you off the tracks with this test case currently going through. Ignore it. But let them know you know it has no affect on you.

I have used Martins letter, but also added my own paragraph which reads:

'While I await with anticipation the ruling from the High Court with regards to a test case to decide the principles of reclaiming bank charges, let me also make it clear that I understand that this has no direct influence on the outcome of requesting default charges with my credit card.'

Please feel free to use this in your letter if claiming back credit card fee's.



Hope this helps?

dita73

i have just watched an article on this on bcc news
this however just states that they are only doing this on excess overdraft charges..according to the news with no mention of other return fees etc...
therefore if i am claiming unpaid direct debit charges and cheque bouncing fees. then surely this is not included in this as these are sperate chrges not uauthorised over draft fees?
???
or am i completely wrong here?

because no one on any news programme etc seems to be clarifying this point?

also if this is the case then how can they freeze claims on this? as its not an unauthorised overdraft fee?
i am so annoyed as most of my charges where from wen i was a single parent struggling to bring up 3 kids on my own, i have recently got re-married and am really annoyed that they can penalise us in this way for being on our uppers through no fault of our own.....

metalmuttversion2

:mad: :mad: Just typical! the consumer has yet again been kept in the dark over something that will potentially scuper their claims, personally i pray the banks lose as those sharks have bee ripping people like us off for years!!:mad:

DotingDad

Given the underhand way this has been announced I wonder whether Martin or other superior beings would consider it worthwhile setting up a petition on the Downing Street website.

Something along the lines that it is unfair for banks and the FOS to arbitarially suspend claims in progress forthwith until such time as a verdict is reached in court if the banks continue to apply the very charges under dispute.

Hopefully the media would pick up on this in the way they did with the road pricing petition and the negative publicity for the banks and government may expedite a decision.

Anyone else agree? I'd do it myself but as the lowest of the low it would attract no publicity. It needs somebody with a "public profile" like Martin to do it in my opinion.

maz19690

How do we prove we are hardship cases?

I'm a single parent who's partner has just left leaving unpaid bills which means I am back to square one on how I received charges in the first place!:mad:

Would they look at the amount or how much money you've got in the bank? I think they need to set a precident on how they will assess this!!
I have watched the vid from last nite and well shocked that Martin was not informed and That Woman! :mad: didn't give a wotsit for anything but what she had rehearsed to say!
I feel a right _pale_ now as got an offer from Nationwide 2 weeks ago offering a payment which was nearly £200.00 under what I was requesting, (not a lot only £700.00 in total but every little helps!). And of course this was through the Financial Ombudsmen, so I wrote a letter back stating not happy with offer, could they please make the offer at the original value, and that I would not accept to wait 6 to 8 weeks for money to appear in account, demanded 7 days!
As you can guess I've not heard anything!

So has this taught me not to be so greedy and I have lost everything, or will they still have to oblige with the offer as they have already offered but rejected?
Good luck to everyone and I really hope if you have already started the ball rolling it will continue. I will be taking out all my money in future and leave enough for the direct debits I can't pay at the post office. I will handle my money like the old days, this will help stop the closure of the local post office also!

Maz
xxx

Stokey125

DotingDad wrote: »

Something along the lines that it is unfair for banks and the FOS to arbitarially suspend claims in progress forthwith until such time as a verdict is reached in court if the banks continue to apply the very charges under dispute.

Hopefully the media would pick up on this in the way they did with the road pricing petition and the negative publicity for the banks and government may expedite a decision.

Anyone else agree? I'd do it myself but as the lowest of the low it would attract no publicity. It needs somebody with a "public profile" like Martin to do it in my opinion.

As I and others have said above the fact of the issuing of the Claim by the OFT DOES NOT ACT AS A SUSPENSION OF A CLAIM. All claims which have already started will continue. The only person who can stay every case in every County Court in England and Wales on this point without separate applications being made is the Lord Chief Justice. Contrary to what some reports have said I do not believe the Master of the Rolls can give such a direction.


Michael

leude98

There is already a petition for this:

You can sign the Petition here

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk:80/Penaltycharges/

I have an interim hearing on 3rd August at T Wells for £3,000 against Nat West for my son and £1,000 against Barclays for his girlfriend.

Fed up now that we might have to wait years for a decision

dita73

what has annoyed me more than anything is that the banks dont have to deal with claims but they can still charge these penalties what a bloomin cheek!!
i am furious..talk about cack handed and rubbing your nose in it ..the banks seem to be in a win win postition to me.. they dont have to deal with your claim for refund of charges even though they may be illegal yet they can still continue with these charges until such a time as deemed otherwise... surely that has to be contempt of court????

get off my soapbox now