Bank Charges Test Case Article discussion

pie81

Lex555 wrote: »

Why on earth is no-one talking about appealing this latest Judgement under the same legislation before we start talking about other clauses? What about the European and International Courts? If the banks can appeal twice against multiple Judgements, then surely the reclaimers should be able to appeal at least twice aswell. And what the hell is the supreme court? I thought only the USA had a "supreme court". I thought it was the house of lords that were trying the latest case/appeal. People say finally there is clarity now and nail in the coffin etc. What the hell are you talking about?!?!

If anything there is now far less clarity as even the courts can't agree on the issue. It's still 2-1 to us. And nail in the coffin? What coffin? There never was a coffin as i believed most people expected the banks to lose. The fact that this so called court are saying 2 other high court judgements were wrong just makes it even less credible and laughable.

I think anyone with an ounce of sense would think that it's blidingly obvious that something "dodgy" has gone on. I'm sure people just daren't elaborate further for fear of making libel comments. Yet a lot of people seem to be taking the judgement seriously by what they're saying. This battle may have been lost, but the war should be far from over.

The House of Lords was re named the Supreme Court earlier this year.

The Supreme Court would have to refer the case to the European Court (the OFT can't go there itself) and it has said there is no need.

I am surprised by the number of posts on this forum suggesting that the judges are biased or have been bribed or leaned on by the government. And yes these comments are libellous. The UK is known for its judges being uncorrupt and unpolitical. You may not like the decision but don't make personal attacks on the judges without any foundation.

nmp183

Just slightly of topic but to put a few posts right.

The term 'Supreme Court' is a bit misleading, the 'Supreme Court' for ourselves sits on the Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald in Luxembourg and is known as European Court of Justice and has been our Supreme Court for some years.

Just another excuse for those in power to spend another few million of taxpayers to glorify themselves.

If anyone has the time and effort then the next step should be an appeal to the proper 'Supreme Court'.

Dojo_Jo_Jo

I am so mad, even the BBC News are referring to this case like it was for the public to get back their bank charges having been in an oversdraft situation. People in a discussion on Radio 2 were even saying that anyone trying to reclaim these charges or going over their overdraft facility was a thief!

It has never been about the fact that bank customers are all charged in these circumstances, the issue was always it was an multi inflated amount that did not reflect the 'service'.

Dojo_Jo_Jo

Hey, here is a good point. If the bank rejects your direct debit charge so you don't go outside your authorised overdraft can we not continue our claim for these charges.

The computer does all the work bar, 1 computer generated letter being sent. Happy to pay for paper and postage!

pingchris

we got screwed and thats all there is to it,just like a very good pick pocket,in out thanks for the cash

Twinkly

Dojo_Jo_Jo wrote: »

It has never been about the fact that bank customers are all charged in these circumstances, the issue was always it was an multi inflated amount that did not reflect the 'service'.

Exactly, but it didn't stop a lot of people from jumping on the bandwagon did it. Divide and conquer is the order of the day.

The banks somehow managed to con some customers into thinking other customers were stealing from them so that nobody would notice who really WAS stealing - from ALL of them. Oh and actually - still are and will be for decades.

chrisharri

What a disappointment today's result was. I, like everybody else here was hoping for the verdict to be in our favour.
I just keep thinking that there might be another clause that we can reclaim on? I take it that those of us that our on hold will be recieving a letter from our banks, telling us that they wont refund our money? How depressing!

theartfullodger

Sigh!

Look guys, s**t happens. We all know this, it is no surprise, we don't always get what we want....

Suggestion:

SUMO ("Shut UP, Move On").

Cheers!

Lodger

lostsoul1977

Hi Guys,

There is a different situation in Scotland - despite any contract all charges must reflect actual loss - common law court case - the fact that the banks suffered no loss or penalty is still a valid argument - the banks would need to show how the charges and the interest reflected their loss. As I understand it the courts will overturn any charges that do not meet the test. So it may be that the case in Scotland will be unsuspended and proceed on that basis. I will research a bit more.

lostsoul1977

Sorry all,

Have just been told that it is the same in England and Wales - would it be worthwhile arguing this point as well as under the Regulations?