Bank Charges Test Case Article discussion

esmerellda

You are talking about this kind of argument - which you MIGHT be able to use if you go through the bank or the FOS but isnt really strong enough for court. This is based on HSBC but should give you the general idea.

I consider that your bank has purposefully misled me into believing the charges were a penalty for my breaching the terms of the contract between myself and your bank. In fact your terms & conditions make no reference whatsoever to the charges relating to the provision of any 'service', which was HSBC's adopted pleaded position during the test case.

The relevant terms at the time I opened my account were;

• 1994
  
  7.2 You must always keep your current account in credit unless we have agreed an overdraft with you.
  
  7.3 You must not go over any' overdraft limit that is agreed with us unless you get our agreement first.

• ANY OTHER TERMS APPLICABLE TO THE PERIOD YOU HELD YOUR ACCOUNT
  

This belief was compounded by letters you have sent me at times when my account has incurred your charges which stated;

• August 2002 ''We will deduct £30.00 from your account to cover the cost of recalling this standing order''

This misrepresentation appears to have been recognised by yourself in September this year when you informed customers;

• September 2008 '' In the Terms and Conditions prior to September 2007 the above stated explanation would not have used the terminology of 'informal overdraft' they would have described the fees being incurred as default charges as the account is not running within its agreed limit. In the most recent Terms and Conditions the charges are no longer described as default charges. I apologise for any confusion cause to yourself regarding this matter''

I feel this was unlawful under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 or, at common law, as a unilateral mistake from which your bank knowingly benefited.

• HSBC misrepresented that the relevant terms were penal as opposed to contracting to provide services, or

• HSBC were aware of your Customer‘s 'mistaken belief' that their relevant terms were penal but failed to correct this, to the detriment of the Consumer but to the benefit of the Banks, alternatively HSBC were aware that the relevant terms were penal in nature but realised they could argue they were in exchange for a package of services and misrepresented to the court accordingly.
  

In any case, the conduct of my account has relied on the misrepresented but reasonable assumption that the relevant terms were related to costs rather than service charges and I contend that the charges should not have been part of the consideration in exchange for any so called contracted 'package' of services.

snortbrick

In my case, i was over my overdraft limit and they charged me throughout a 11 month period as far as i can remember. I explained to them my circumstances with regard having only credit cards to pay them with, which were max'd!. They didn't care. I asked if they would help in some way. They didn't and stood by the full payments.

shaunc49

the whole deal with regards to the verdict is an establishment cop-out !!!
it wouldn't suprise me if they were all freemasons who'll end up on the "board " of some bank or another. £3600 they owe me....that'd clear my overdraft easy......now ??. im stuck with this bloody debt forever.

orc_2

shaunc49 wrote: »

the whole deal with regards to the verdict is an establishment cop-out !!!
it wouldn't suprise me if they were all freemasons who'll end up on the "board " of some bank or another. £3600 they owe me....that'd clear my overdraft easy......now ??. im stuck with this bloody debt forever.

All is not necessarily lost.

New arguments are being developed and new guidance should be available towards the end of January on this site.

Don't depend on anything though.

P_Walters

Shaunc49 you are so right, freemasons and old boys still rule. I believe this probably rocked their little world a bit but we were never going to be allowed to win this fight and the judgement stinks. I still say that if some people were paid for goodwill then why not others? Doesn't it make it prejudicial. Or, can it go to Europe (do they have the dreaded freemasons there??). There must still be a few things they can be taken to court over if the wording they used was picked apart enough. I just can't believe how corrupt this country seems to be right now.

gtivano21

Hoping my experience with Deutsche Bank branch in Marbella my warn other
not to do business with them.
On my application to open a non-resident bank account I was very impress
with the information’s I did receive in English and the quickness to
complete all the paper work.
On my return to the UK I did transfer from south Ireland 459009.25 euros
and DB charge me 1836.36 commission.
After 2 months I saw a 25 euros charge for them to check my non-resident
status (never been informed).
I did try to pay with my DB debit card 2500 euros and I was rejected.
I did contact my personal adviser and I was told there is a limit of 2000 euros x
day (never been told).
I did try to make an international transfer of 350000 euros on line and the
limit is 12000 euro x day and of course I did contact my p.a. and I was
informed that she can't help me in any way unless I go to the branch in
person.
Here I am in the other side of the world with DB refusing to help me.
Please if you do open an account in Spain or anywhere else make sure to ask
all the questions and do not take anything for granted.
I have had bank accounts in different countries with different banks and I
never had any problems like this.

P_Walters

gtivano21 wrote: »

Hoping my experience with Deutsche Bank branch in Marbella my warn other
not to do business with them.
On my application to open a non-resident bank account I was very impress
with the information’s I did receive in English and the quickness to
complete all the paper work.
On my return to the UK I did transfer from south Ireland 459009.25 euros
and DB charge me 1836.36 commission.
After 2 months I saw a 25 euros charge for them to check my non-resident
status (never been informed).
I did try to pay with my DB debit card 2500 euros and I was rejected.
I did contact my personal adviser and I was told there is a limit of 2000 euros x
day (never been told).
I did try to make an international transfer of 350000 euros on line and the
limit is 12000 euro x day and of course I did contact my p.a. and I was
informed that she can't help me in any way unless I go to the branch in
person.
Here I am in the other side of the world with DB refusing to help me.
Please if you do open an account in Spain or anywhere else make sure to ask
all the questions and do not take anything for granted.
I have had bank accounts in different countries with different banks and I
never had any problems like this.

Probably saw you were a British resident and started rubbing their hands with glee, I bet we're the mugs of the world at the moment with no protection whatsoever. The gloves appear to be off with this fight and we are left in no uncertain terms of where we stand. When I have dealings with my bank I ask them not to bother to be polite, I'm not interested in all that faux niceness. Got the na-na-na-na-na letter from Barclays and recognise it wouldn't be worth the paper it's written on if I could afford the law.

pingchris

the 12 faces that,in my opinion help protect the government, and the banks from being lawfully attacked for there mistakes and rip off charges,the supreme court members originally law lords repackaged and wheeled out as a seperate system for all people,but really just the wall we are all stuck behind...................... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8283961.stm

charles_b1984

pingchris wrote: »

the 12 faces that,in my opinion help protect the government, and the banks from being lawfully attacked for there mistakes and rip off charges,the supreme court members originally law lords repackaged and wheeled out as a seperate system for all people,but really just the wall we are all stuck behind......................

That's the problem with this country, politics are archaic and "traditional" and people are born in to power-"Lord"?! what a crock of S H I T

natweststaffmember

charles_b1984 wrote: »

That's the problem with this country, politics are archaic and "traditional" and people are born in to power-"Lord"?! what a crock of S H I T

Those 12 were appointed to the House of Lords based on their experience of the Law not on what their political persuasions are.

and Pingchris....hope you've enjoyed the festive period and I guess it's soon time to rock and roll again on the banter