Expectations of outcome of the test case

steveh66_2

Hello all

apologies in advance if it's not my place to post this, but could we have a 'quick and dirty' survey of what people expect the judgement from the current test case to be? I can see three obvious resolutions: 1) charges are lawful and fully above board and the banks can keep on fleecing us; 2) charges are unlawful and they must be refunded; 3) charges have been too high but a fixed figure around the £12 credit card value (? or more) is lawful, so people must be refunded the difference. I'll be honest, despite the law as it stands, and the banks' implicit acceptance of this (why else would they have payed out so much if they genuinely felt they had a valid case?) I fully expect either number 1 or 3, the latter being judged to be a fair way higher than £12. Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but certain factors don't sit well with me, such as the banks' ACCEPTING this test case after months of 'negotiations' (in their favour, no doubt), and the fact that service industries are all this country has left, of which financial services constitute a huge part, and I can't see political or judicial will daring to risk their massive profits in any way. So - what do you anticipate?

By the way, PLEASE don't think I'm suggesting we roll over and let them pre-emptively win by discontinuing with our claims. Until we hear the judgement we've ultimately every hope. Good luck all!

lindilou39

steveh66 wrote: »

Hello all

apologies in advance if it's not my place to post this, but could we have a 'quick and dirty' survey of what people expect the judgement from the current test case to be? I can see three obvious resolutions: 1) charges are lawful and fully above board and the banks can keep on fleecing us; 2) charges are unlawful and they must be refunded; 3) charges have been too high but a fixed figure around the £12 credit card value (? or more) is lawful, so people must be refunded the difference. I'll be honest, despite the law as it stands, and the banks' implicit acceptance of this (why else would they have payed out so much if they genuinely felt they had a valid case?) I fully expect either number 1 or 3, the latter being judged to be a fair way higher than £12. Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but certain factors don't sit well with me, such as the banks' ACCEPTING this test case after months of 'negotiations' (in their favour, no doubt), and the fact that service industries are all this country has left, of which financial services constitute a huge part, and I can't see political or judicial will daring to risk their massive profits in any way. So - what do you anticipate?

By the way, PLEASE don't think I'm suggesting we roll over and let them pre-emptively win by discontinuing with our claims. Until we hear the judgement we've ultimately every hope. Good luck all!

no one can pre-estimate the outcome, but in my oppinion and it is just my oppinion, I dont think there will be any losers on this.

MPG_2

I'm in agreement with Linilou. The banks have refunded far too much money for anything less than implicite agreement that the charges are unlawful. Whether we agree with the timing or the conditions of the test case (i.e suspension of claims), or not, it is vital. Banks have gotten away with daylight robbery for far too long and it's got to stop. I feel the OFT will fight our corner and with people like Martin holding the consummer banner, the banks will have to answer some tough questions. I'm keeping the faith. It must end well for us claiments. If not, perhaps a riot?

Mark7799

It has to be 1 or 3 - the charges themselves are lawful - it's the level at which they are charged is under attack. However, my understanding, as has been expressed by others on these boards is that there may be a change of law to the Unfair Terms Contracts act to set a maximum level of charges.