We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Bank Charges Test Case Article discussion
Comments
-
You are being very very very hopeful. The Supreme Court are not deciding if the bank charges are fair, they are deciding if the law on unfair contracts applies to bank charges.gorden brown gave the banks in the last ten days £60 billion pounds,im hoping that is some of ours,are they getting ready to pay,or am i being very very hopefull.0 -
for every £200 the banks invest in sending out letters telling you that your account has missed a direct debit,there profit is £7600 ish...............is it me or is this figure bloody mindblowing,is that more lucrative than investing in oil,er i suspect so.................gorden bennet now thats one big money bank tap.......
thats got to be the easiest way of making billions ive ever seen in my entire life,just send letters.........missed direct debit charges,very odd,theres no pain so how come the big gain,i.e £39.00 for a letter0 -
And is there a question on restitutionary damages coming up?for every £200 the banks invest in sending out letters telling you that your account has missed a direct debit,there profit is £7600 ish...............is it me or is this figure bloody mindblowing,is that more lucrative than investing in oil,er i suspect so.................gorden bennet now thats one big money bank tap.......0 -
why would i be asking a question about that ????
or did i misunderstandmissed direct debit charges,very odd,theres no pain so how come the big gain,i.e £39.00 for a letter0 -
why would i be asking a question about that ????
or did i misunderstand
Cos worst case scenario for the banks is bank charges reclaimed back to January 1995 and what is known as restitutionary damages or additional compensation as a result of it. In fact, if truth be know the number of equations and consequences of the banks losing the case is mind boggling.0 -
Please ignore those people who post on this forum who deliberately try to misinform you. Don't be bullied by them, don't be blamed by them. You know who I mean.
You come here for advice, help and support- thats what I and like minded others will try to do.0 -
as long as we get the charges back first they can argue about the rest latermissed direct debit charges,very odd,theres no pain so how come the big gain,i.e £39.00 for a letter0
-
It is a very good article which explains what happens should the OFT win, the banks' win etc,etc,.0 -
Natwest due to the restitutionary damages being in the mix i would of thought it would be in the banks best interest (if they lose the test case) to make a speedy agreement with the oft on a way to settle the issue of compensation.0
-
Not the case. If they make an agreement on a fair charge with CURRENT account charges, it still leaves the issues of HISTORIC charges which is where the restitutionary bit would come into the mix.Natwest due to the restitutionary damages being in the mix i would of thought it would be in the banks best interest (if they lose the test case) to make a speedy agreement with the oft on a way to settle the issue of compensation.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards