Bank Charges Test Case Article discussion

debrag

so I could be looking at getting nothing back?

Louling06

Does the reclaiming charges hold apply to finance companies as my father-in-law was told this in court when counter claiming against a finance company?

showergirl

Looks like we will have to wait until late Oct to mid Nov to see if we are going to get any money back. There are times when I wish the OFT had just minded their own business, as I think this case is too big for them to handle. I believe the judge in this case is on our side, but somehow I do not see us getting any money back. I am sorry to sound down in the dumps, but I am sick off having my hopes built up just to have them knocked down again. The OFT have had this case for over a year and they are still no forward in publishing their findings. How come everyone else can see that it is unfair to charge £35 to £40 for something that should only cost a fiver. I think Martin should represent us in court, I have more faith in him.

natweststaffmember

If the OFT had left the situation the same you would have Barwick cases(he LOST) and other determination by judges that went in favour of the claimant. The Appeal is likely November. Remember that if the case had followed normal timescales then we may not have been even at the stage we are today. Martin Lewis, for all his guile and zeal, is not a QC and is a, i hope you don't mind me saying this, journalist. He may know how to get the cheapest silk but is not a qualified silk

kentyck1

has anyone had anything back from the abbey, or heard anything like what is happening with the nationwide

chris

Wicksylad

Is it worth starting the ball rolling now or wait - I currently have an overdraft with HSBC of 2100.00, but have paid over 1500 in bank charges over the past 6 years. I am selling my house due to a failed marriage &will be using some of the equity to clear all of my/our debts (including the overdraft) - if i start a claim now, will the bank play arsey by reducing my overdraft once the claim is processed?

borgbaiter

Hi

The OFT seem to have lost the plot.

1-they were offered the court of appeal at the end of july and refused it, as they wont be ready.
2-the judge virtually invited them to ask for an injunction against banks applying charges, they didnt ask for it.
3-theyve admitted they cant afford to take it to the next stage and are hoping the FSA will take over the case.
4-the judge even smelt a rat and said it wouldnt be in the public interest for the parties to do a deal without finishing the litigation.

i have no problem with the judge but the OFT have really got my back up


Borgbaiter

Tozer

borgbaiter wrote: »

Hi

The OFT seem to have lost the plot.

1-they were offered the court of appeal at the end of july and refused it, as they wont be ready.
2-the judge virtually invited them to ask for an injunction against banks applying charges, they didnt ask for it.
3-theyve admitted they cant afford to take it to the next stage and are hoping the FSA will take over the case.
4-the judge even smelt a rat and said it wouldnt be in the public interest for the parties to do a deal without finishing the litigation.

i have no problem with the judge but the OFT have really got my back up


Borgbaiter

1, - they may not have been ready to go to the Court of Appeal. However, cases follow "Directions". You don't just show up at the CA when you feel like it.

2. Why would an injunction be offered? They are granted in massively rare circumstances following the American Cyanamid case.

3. Never get into litigation if you can't afford it! Where have they admitted this?

4. The judge would have been fulfilling Civil Procedure Rules, part 1 - the overriding objective to avoid litigation, to keep costs to a minimum and to continue to seek a resolve without the intervention of the courts.

borgbaiter

thanks tozer :-S

yo_annie2007

what is going on with the banks are claims still on hold