Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Former MSE Helen
    • By Former MSE Helen 20th Apr 11, 9:26 AM
    • 2,324Posts
    • 971Thanks
    Former MSE Helen
    MSE News: Banks lose crucial PPI judicial review
    • #1
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:26 AM
    MSE News: Banks lose crucial PPI judicial review 20th Apr 11 at 9:26 AM
    This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

    "Banks have lost a crucial High Court judicial review into the future PPI reclaiming ..."

    Last edited by Former MSE Helen; 20-04-2011 at 1:56 PM.
Page 1
  • proeleche
    • #2
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:31 AM
    • #2
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:31 AM
    Excellent news! However, I have a feeling the banks will attempt to appeal all the way to the Lords again.
    • mjan
    • By mjan 20th Apr 11, 9:33 AM
    • 67 Posts
    • 54 Thanks
    mjan
    • #3
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:33 AM
    • #3
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:33 AM
    Good news!

    Just a shame the banks are allowed to appeal so we have to wait a longer time for our money but still good news
  • JamJarPot
    • #4
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:50 AM
    • #4
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:50 AM
    Very Happy . Knowing the way banks are I have a feeling this won't last, as it will be appealed until the outcome is in favour of the banks.
  • Iain1983
    • #5
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:51 AM
    • #5
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:51 AM
    Excellent news!
  • metalgal
    • #6
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:53 AM
    • #6
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:53 AM
    I haven't had PPI but I am sure someone in my family has. The banks will try to worm their way out of it, but I will be curious to read the case to see why they lost.
    • J i m
    • By J i m 20th Apr 11, 9:56 AM
    • 1,299 Posts
    • 1,704 Thanks
    J i m
    • #7
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:56 AM
    • #7
    • 20th Apr 11, 9:56 AM
    I wouldn't want to get carried away by this yet to be honest.

    The BBA is bound to appeal, so this is set to drag on for a long while yet.

    How many times can a losing side appeal before the case is thrown out altogether?
    • marshallka
    • By marshallka 20th Apr 11, 10:16 AM
    • 14,494 Posts
    • 20,661 Thanks
    marshallka
    • #8
    • 20th Apr 11, 10:16 AM
    • #8
    • 20th Apr 11, 10:16 AM
    The high court judgment endorsed the approach taken by the ombudsman and the FSA, and the banks now have 21 days to appeal.

    Then how long after (if they appeal that is!!!) will the next stage take and will they continue to look into complaints even then. Will they defy the FSA still?
    • liam8282
    • By liam8282 20th Apr 11, 10:28 AM
    • 2,737 Posts
    • 1,556 Thanks
    liam8282
    • #9
    • 20th Apr 11, 10:28 AM
    • #9
    • 20th Apr 11, 10:28 AM
    I wouldn't hold out any hope, it will be appealed until the banks can eventually swing one decision there way, just like they did with the bank charges.

    Corruption at it's best if you ask me.

    • di3004
    • By di3004 20th Apr 11, 11:06 AM
    • 42,528 Posts
    • 56,679 Thanks
    di3004
    http://www.bba.org.uk/media/article/judgement-handed-down-on-bba-judicial-review

    Judgement handed down on BBA judicial review

    “On behalf of its members, the BBA requested a judicial review of the way in which the industry should handle complaints about PPI sales, as set out in the Financial Services Authority's policy statement.
    “Whilst the UK banking industry has to date implemented every reform on PPI sales and complaints handling required by the regulators, the additional requirements in the policy statement effectively apply new standards to past sales, which we believe go beyond the rules and regulatory requirements which were developed by the regulator over time.

    “It was due to the widespread concerns that the FSA and the Financial Ombudsman Service had not properly applied the law in this area – and only having exhausted all other avenues for resolving the underlying dispute that a judicial review was sought.
    “We are disappointed with today’s judgment and now need to consider the details of it very carefully as well as next steps, including whether it would be appropriate to apply for permission to appeal.

    “Any complaints that are directly affected by the judicial review and therefore can not be decided will continue to be placed on hold until the next steps have been decided. We will continue to work closely with the FSA to ensure that all complaints are appropriately handled and customers are not disadvantaged. Customers who are considering making a complaint or who have a specific query about an existing complaint should contact their bank in the first instance.”
    The one and only "Dizzy Di"
    • J i m
    • By J i m 20th Apr 11, 11:40 AM
    • 1,299 Posts
    • 1,704 Thanks
    J i m
    So basically they're going to leave us hanging for 21 days, and then bang! "Muahhahaah! We're appealing."
  • marko-007
    Ye thats what i expect to happen Jim. they will probably drag it out as long as possible!

    Q) If by some unbelievable miracle they just take it on the chin (unlikely) Does that mean the claims will be dealt with quicker? i.e not take the best part of a year to decide on a refund?
    Carpe Diem
  • MrLeeLee
    Surely this will just go the same way as the bank charging case?

    They'll appeal at every opportunity, dragging their heels and when it gets to the final appeal, despite every other decision going against the banks, the big boys (who no doubt have a lot of friends in high places who would be affected by this) will decide in favour of the banks?

    Sorry to be so negative and I would love to be wrong (even though I have no personally interest in this as I am not affected I love seeing the banks getting a kick in!) but to me it's just the way it works.
  • steveb69
    No punishment
    I cannot understand why it has taken so many years for this problem to be raised by the FSA. If this was a small business such as a mortgage broker or IFA I am sure they would have had quicker & more severe punishment with jaw dropping fines Again the banks rule supreme when it comes to making up the rules.

    I am however a bit worried about bashing the poor banks now that us the taxpayer seem to indirectly have an interest in their welfare.
    Maybe the regulator could impose a 3 year longstop as they did with endowment misselling scandal to prevent people from claiming. This might help the banks out a bit & see a few more consumers out of pocket.

    The worst part of this is how these banks , loan sharks, brokers are able to simply keep there heads low & hope people dont complain while they continue to collect huge commission payments from every monthly payment. With the pension misselling scandal, companies were forced to write to all policyholders & review every sale, & then offer compensation. Surely this is the only acceptable outcome for the consumer.

    It appears most consumers were too disinterested/or lazy to read the policies in the first place & decide for themselves if they actually needed them or question the advice given, being usually just happy to simply get a loan regardless of costs. Clearly those same consumers may be equally lazy in realizing they can claim compo that they may well deserve, or perhaps too scared to upset their bank incase they might get refused for that next loan or overdraft!
    • Consumerist
    • By Consumerist 20th Apr 11, 3:20 PM
    • 5,203 Posts
    • 2,604 Thanks
    Consumerist
    I must confess I don't quite understand how the FOS has allowed itself to become clogged-up by the banks' failure to co-operate with claims disputes. In court, if the other side doesn't show up then they lose by default; why isn't this happening at the FOS?
    Last edited by Consumerist; 20-04-2011 at 3:26 PM.
    Warning: In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
  • Culex
    I must confess I don't quite understand how the FOS has allowed itself to become clogged-up by the banks' failure to co-operate with claims disputes. In court, if the other side doesn't show up then they lose by default; why isn't this happening at the FOS?
    Originally posted by Consumerist
    What else might one expect of the Fobbing-Off Service?
  • Culex
    Now, banks must lift this hold though they're refusing to for now. In that case, it's time for the regulator, the FSA, to get meaty on their backsides.

    If banks won't follow the rules, they shouldn't be allowed to play the game at all. Threatening big fines is irrelevant – a punishment charge of £10 million means nothing to banks if it saves them £1 billion in payouts.

    The only credible threat is suspending their licence to do insurance business – nothing else will scare them into compliance and it should be done right away.
    Does anyone really believe that the Fundamentally Supine Authority will even threaten such action?
    • Consumerist
    • By Consumerist 20th Apr 11, 4:15 PM
    • 5,203 Posts
    • 2,604 Thanks
    Consumerist
    The only consolation for the customer in all this is that the longer the banks delay, the higher the interest compensation will be at 8% pa. - which you can't get in a savings account at the moment.
    Warning: In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
    • marshallka
    • By marshallka 20th Apr 11, 4:21 PM
    • 14,494 Posts
    • 20,661 Thanks
    marshallka
    The only consolation for the customer in all this is that the longer the banks delay, the higher the interest compensation will be at 8% pa. - which you can't get in a savings account at the moment.
    Originally posted by Consumerist
    That is of course providing the banks lose again.

    Looking at this in a warped way, the banks could appeal, the consumer could lose out and all the time whilst waiting for the court case again more and more people are put off reclaiming and more complaints become time barred.

    Lets hope that justice is had and that consumers are redressed in a class action whereby they are written to and told they have (or may have) been missold and a cheque is on the way. Collective redress. That is the best outcome.
    • Petef
    • By Petef 20th Apr 11, 6:27 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    Petef
    Is it the Banks fault?
    Lets face it the regulator should have stepped in long ago to stop this but didn't!

    So while they (the Banks) can get away with it they will, like selling sub prime mortgages to each other!

    It's us the customer who always end up paying !!!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

292Posts Today

4,621Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Mini MSE is on half term next week, so I'm excited to be taking the week off to be daddy. As normal I'm signing of? https://t.co/G3366shWh1

  • I once blurted out on @gmb "Theresa May hasn't been given a poisoned chalice - she's been given a poisoned chalice? https://t.co/onfRbY3XVg

  • It'd be fascinating to know how history will judge Theresa May's premiership. Currently, it is hard to see it as a? https://t.co/eH77G0O9LA

  • Follow Martin