mit

iTrader: (10)

Does anyone know a good site for updates on the bank charges case? Any ideas when the house of lords will give their decision?

Thanks,Mit

tanyatriangles

iTrader: (2)

Firstly, I wouldn't hold my breath for a result for a while: this government have been in bed with the bankers for a while and in the current financial climate, the banks say they can't afford to pay

Secondly, following on from the above, expect a decision AGAINST the claimants and FOR the banks when it does come. It'll be buried when something big is announced.

You know it makes sense: it's the Lying Labour way.

yoza

I put a claim in with my credit card company I used to be with (MBNA), it was so long ago I had forgotten I did it.

Two weeks back they offerd me £32 in the form of a cheque attached to a letter.

I cashed it and wrote back to them that I would take this money as a down payment on the full amount they owed me.

Two weeks after that, I got another cheque with the full amount I had claimed for.

Very surprised indeed.

Not heard from the bank ones though.

Boro

iTrader: (1)

Decision is going through this month but that is only to decide whether the OFT has jurisdiction as far as im aware.

mit

iTrader: (10)

I can't see how the latest decision can be any different to the two previous, that both went in favor of the OFT.
I understand it's a big hit for the banks if they lost, but the money they would have to pay out would go back into the economy. It's money they've unjustly taken, it's not cost them anything to get it. The indicated £12 per charge seems fair, any more, pay it back!
The banks have indicated that if they have to pay back these charges, they will levy a charge for personal bank accounts,(they just need an excuse) so they won't be loosing anything, in the long run, they'll make money.
My fear is they will go in favor of the OFT, but date it from the decision date, meaning all previous charges will be written off, but they'll be prevented from charging more than £12 a charge in the future.

hodgy0_2

i claimed on both mine and my wifes, lloyds and hsbc

hsbc (wifes) sent cheque for £1400,00 with only one letter

lloyds -- who I had been with for 25 years, nothing (on a £620 claim) -- so i moved my overdraught elswhere, (and am still due settlement of my claim should the banks loose - muppets)

Gordo

2 thoughts on this:

1. There is a real chance that Labour will force the two banks they've kindly bought on our behalf to pay claimants as a nice little vote buyer (their logic being that the demographic involved are more likely to be Labour voters).

2. I personally don't think anyone deserves any money back. Anyone paying the charges signed up to them and knew they were there. Not exactly hidden in the small print. If I lent someone £500, say, and told them I'd have to charge a penalty for taking more, then I'd expect them to bloody pay up as they'd just become a higher risk borrower (doesn't matter that it only cost me £50p to send them a letter letting them know!). But in the new socialist compensation world we live in, I guess it's inevitable.....

hodgy0_2

the problem is that in the 80's Thatcher privatised the finance industry, which on balance was a good thing, prior to this access to finance/capital was strictly controlled and only available to the "favoured" few with bank accounts at Couts, ***** and Co and the such like

however, there was no corresponding education of the masses in the matter of finance etc, leading to a lopsided market where financial rip-offs are common

the Bank Charges, if the consumer council wins, will be on a point of law nothing else

I generally don't believe in the compensation (it always someone else fault) culture, but on balance the general public of UK plc have been fvcked by the finance industry in the last 30 years --- pension miss selling, endowment mortgages, payment protection the list is endless

Gordo

I agree with your list, hodgy, but everyone's know for decades that bank accounts charge you money if you go overdrawn, or over your overdraft limits. It's a simple concept - and doesn't feel mis-sold in the slightest.

Whereas pensions, endowments, PPI, extended warranties, investment trusts and many many more have been mis-sold.

Oh, and not sure Thatcher privatised it - it was mostly driven by a free market and technology, wasn't it?

hodgy0_2

i meant in the sense that she created the free market and the culture of privatisation, as there was no one thing to privatise like Rail, BT etc

and if the banks loose they will loose because they got the law wrong

but its funny, coz in cases like this its usually the firms that try and charge for advice in reclaiming bank charges/Income protection insurance etc etc that make the money, people are so lazy that not only is it someone else fault they cant even be bothered to do anything about it

why pay someone for something that is so easy to do -- another example of our total naïveté when it come to finance

speedking

The moneysavingexpert seems pretty sure. I thought it was about the terminology used. Charges are not 'penalties' but fees and so must be proportional to the actual cost incurred by the bank, which they patently are not. Therefore, even though they are written into the contract, they are illegal and not enforceable.