Time To End Unfair Bank Charges
The Banks seem to have been encouraged by the recent court result in Birmingham in which a district court found in their favour over a bank charges refund claim. The BBC is reporting several cases of customers receiving letters or phone calls from banks who are suggesting that their claims are likely to fail following this result.
It would seem that this new tactic is intended to try and scare people off from claiming refunds for their penalty bank charges even though the case cannot, apparently, be used as a precedent in other courts. The case referred to was found in the Bank’s favour after the judge considered their terms and conditions. It would seem that he ruled on the basis that they had followed their own terms and conditions rather than ruling on the case as to whether they were legally allowed to make these charges.
The Banks with their heavy handed approach are once again are clearly demonstrating that customers are not what they care about and customer service is considered a joke to them. No company that wants to maintain good relations with it’s customers is going to penalise them and charge them ridiculous fees is it? Rather than explaining and listing the work they have carried out in dealing with a defaulting account the banks simply deduct money from the defaulting customer’s account with no regard to the effect that might have on the customer.
Perhaps they are concerned that if people saw an invoice something like the following, it would make them look like rip-off merchants?.. ‘Computer printout of standard letter, including postage using one piece of paper, one envelope, less than a penny’s worth of electricity & ink and one postage stamp…. £35 Not forgetting that they then proceed to bounce any further transactions and charge you again for a similar letter plus excess overdraft fees and any other charges they can think up.
This complete lack of customer care and the way that all the banks appear to act together and speak with one voice and behave in similar ways proves that competition isn’t working. There is no competition when all of the banks behave in such similar ways. If, as it appears, competition isn’t working then the government must step in and take action. Government has a responsibility not just because they are supposed to represent, protect and defend the public from those who would unfairly abuse them but also because more and more, the government is encouraging people to have bank accounts to receive payments of pensions, benefits and grants.
It is becoming essential in the modern world to have a bank account so banking has moved to a level beyond just a private service for those who want it. We now have a situation where banking has become an essential public service so it must be properly supervised to prevent abuses.
There is currently an OFT investigation into banking but that is for the longer term. It is not expected to report until the end of the year
In the meantime banks continue to make a mockery of the legal system by claiming they will defend cases in court but they don’t turn up and they have been paying out the claims in full. The case referred to at the beginning of this piece was a case like this except it would appear the bank forgot about it. They had no representative in court when the case was heard. They either had forgotten about it or they just couldn’t be bothered to turn up. Either way it demonstrates a lack of regard and respect for the legal system.
The banks give every reasonable person the impression that they consider themselves above the law.
The law states that default fees should only reflect the cost of administering the default. In an age of computer generated letters and account management it is hard to see how the costs can be higher than a couple of pounds at most. The banks, as yet, have made no attempt to demonstrate they are justified in making the charges they currently apply.
They are being less than honest in claiming they will defend cases when experience has shown they do not do so. A court in Leeds recently had 77 claims listed for trial on one particular day but as the day wore on all claims were settled in favour of the claimants with not one actually reaching the court. Thousands of people have successfully reclaimed their bank charges often with additional interest charges but not once have the banks appeared in court to challenge the claim. Yet they continue to argue that these charges are fair and reasonable.
The OFT decided last year that it was prepared to challenge credit card fees in excess of £12 and the whole credit card industry dropped their charges to £12 or less. Up until that change they had maintained that their charges were legal and fair. Just as the banks now claim in regard to bank charges. So why weren’t the credit card companies prepared to justify those higher charges in court?
It is time something was done. I fear we shall have to await the outcome of the OFT review but this has been going on for far too long already. Far too many people have been punished with charges mounted upon charges for quite small mistakes in their account management. Few people would argue that any charge is unfair but very very few would even try to argue that these charges applied by the banks are fair.
Related posts:
- OFT Abandon Bank Charges Fairness Case There is disppointing news on bank penalty charges today....
- Bank To Remove Bank Charges In an interesting development ahead of the soon expected ruling...
- Banks Reducing Bank Charges There has been interesting news on the question of bank...
- Shock Penalty Charges Ruling By Supreme Court The long awaited announcement of the ruling by the supreme...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Hi
I have read with interest you comments and noted that you were going to court over the unenforceability of as you say most credit card agreements. I presume this has to do with the Prescribed terms which have not been correctly stated or the omission of certain prescribed terms making the agreements unenforceable in a court of law.
you are probably aware of the following website called loan checker. Are you connected?
My own interest is in unsecured overdrafts and whether an overdraft facility may also be unenforceable in a court of law as the only terms on the overdraft form were:
Amount of overdraft 10000
Arrangement fee 0
Security fees 0
Type of interest rate Gold card
interest rate (Variable) per annum 10.99%
Expiry date of facility 12/07/01
I don’t know whether this NEEDS to contains all the prescribed terms-
Here are the links:
http://www.financialagreementsolutions.co.uk/checkersystem.html
http://www.checkmyagreement.co.uk/about%20us.html
Do you have a Credit Agreement?
If you have it may not comply with the law.
You can check your Credit Agreement totally FREE of CHARGE to see if it is legal.
Check your agreement then make a claim completely free of charge.
Test cases you may be aware of
http://www.journalonline.co.uk/news/1002058.aspx
National westminster bank Plv – V – Kitch 91996) 1 wlr 1316
Your comments above leave me a little surprised as consumer groups such as consumer credit support have been challenging the enforceability of credit agreements for some time now.
Not only are we challenging these unenforceable agreements but we are winning cases in court.
I would say that challenging these agreements is not a method we advocate to avoid debt, but in cases where the creditor has failed to comply with the law in preparing the agreement then it does leave them open to a legal challenge.
Anybody can check an agreement and challenge it at little or no cost and many of our members relish the challenge of going into court as litigants.
I would be very interested in the case number of your Court of Appeal victory as none of the court websites are showing any details of it.
I too am a little flumoxed.
The ‘unenforceable’ issue appears to be irrelevant to this ‘victory’, as the court re-opened the credit bargain and appears to have ruled it ‘an extortionate credit agreement’.
It does not seem that the credit agreement was ruled unenforceable due to lack of prescribed terms, but due to inclusion in the ‘Total Amount for Credit’ being incorrect!
A case number would certainly be in the public interest to support the theory – which as Dave mentions above, is something we have been tackling for some time now!
I too am a little perplexed about your claim as I can find no record in any of the case law databases.”Unenforceable agreements” is something that has been mooted about for some years.Just to name a few cases that come to mind are Wilson vs First County and Wilson vs Hurstanger Ltd.You may get more mileage over your claim if you can prove the manuscript of your COA.
What utter twaddle Mr and Mrs Basil and Amanada Rankine are claiming.
I have had two credit cards settled, why because one was improperly executed and the other the creditor could not locate the original alleged agreement. It didn’t even have to go to Court.
I did this all by myself and certainly was able to resource all the reference material I need with help of friends.
If as the Rankine’s claim this went to the CoA, was it in Chancery?
What utter rubbish they are espousing.
Why pay for this sort of help, when you can DIY with the right assistance.
Nowe I am on to the DCA and the CRA’s for processing erroneous information.
OBTW, are the Rankine’s registered with the ICO as they would holding other people’s data? Or am I wrong with this assumption?
I am really upset when people set themselves to make money out of other’s misfortune
I can find no successfull appeal for either of the Rankines, the only ones I found at the RCJ in London were refused in May 07 and again in October 07. I can get no joy from the CAB or the legal arm they used, has this whole thing been exposed as a charade?Why is the last comment on this subject is some 3 months ago?
Can anybody shed any light on this matter
Hi Everyone,
If you have had success, can you please leave details so others can benefit.
Dragonlady has had success, can you please let us know what procedure you went through to achieve your result.
does anyone know about overdrafts and consumer law?
I read this with interest and the updated case decision from June 2008. The problem with making these types of claims is that they are in their very nature ‘dishonest’ and therefore unlikely to progress. You see the law can be decided in equity, and there are of course three rules of interpretation which allow the judge (tonge in cheek) to come to any conclusion he or she so desires.
It is sad that some “financial advisors”….ah hem…are preying on unfortunate debtors. If you are a debtor and you are struggling then do not be drawn in by companies professing to be able to wipe your debt. Ask your creditor to freeze your accounts and interest and make what payments you can. Whilst you are making these payments i.e. £1 a month ask for your Credit agreement and if they can’t produce it, then everytime they ask you to increase your payments, ask them again to produce the original agreement. this way you pay back what you had off them but on your terms. If you had the money don’t avoid the debt but instead administer the process of repayment by using the CCA
I have a company in Manchester dealing with this and although i would have done this myself if i had the time and know how im quite happy paying 119. They have already cleared one of my credit cards because the credit card company had followed the incorrect procedure. I would go on this website as it seems to have a load of info on it. http://www.unfaircreditagreement.info. they state that it isnt for everybody.
It looks like Basil and Amanda Rankine are using loopholes in order to get out of paying for their irresponsible borrowing and forcing others to pay the price for their luxuries and assets. They were just trying it on because they found out something was not legal – well if the agreement wasn’t legal then the borrowing wasn’t legal and they should have to pay back what they borrowed without interest. But they didn’t want that – they wanted the entire amount wiped off.
Whilst they were successful in getting £100,000 written off they had legal fees of that much so whilst solicitors are £100,000 better off the banks are £100,000 worst off – not that that is much to them, but it is the principle that counts. At the end of the day the customers pay the price for their greed, selfishness and lack of integrity.
At least they are no better off even though they are trying to claim that they were succeeded – all it shows is that they were intent on getting away without paying for what they borrowed.
There are too many people like these in the country who want something for nothing, but bear in mind the best things in life are free and if anyone values financial and material assets more expecting others to go without or pay the price, then the best things in these people’s lives are not worth very much.
I am sorry to hear they are still burdened with this debt.
Serves you right. You had the money and didn’t want to repay it; now you’re stung with court costs equal to the debt you’re trying to evade. There is justice in this world.
John W, it seems the justice in this world is that everybody loses out except the lawyers who always profit from other people’s suffering.
The banks lose out on the money, the Rankines lose the money but the lawyers make over £100,000
I’m not sure I would call that justice.
As Murphy has already requested, can anyone who has been successful in a DIY claim please leave information on specific reference material on this site.
Unfair credit agreement claims refers to the process under which an aggrieved customer seeks out to reclaim the amount paid for a loan if the agreement executed is unfair. In a stricter sense, it means that if a person is a victim of an unfair loan agreement for which he has been making payments, he / she can make claims to seek the return of the money. This is common practice in most countries.
The claim can be sought on various financial products resulting in credit card agreement claims, unsecured loan claims and personal finance claims. There are agencies which specialise in helping victims of unfair credit agreements seek a refund. These agencies charge a fee to carry out the process. The claim process will not be completed overnight since it involves a lengthy process of negotiations. However, at every step, the customer is updated on the developments. The fee ranges differ and depend on the number of agreements. For instance, there are agencies which charge £150 for claims over £2,000.
It is up to the customer to choose the agency which can help in securing the claims. There are various agencies all over the country that specialise in this particular line of work. You can employ the services of such agencies in case you have legitimate claim in view of an unfair credit agreement. These agencies can be tracked through the internet or through local advertising. There is also a chance for the potential customer to evaluate their process by looking into past cases and successfull claims. The reviews of the agency’s performance are available for perusal.
Once you contact an agency, make your case very clear. Never try to hide or destroy facts. The agency will decide whether you have a genuine case by looking into all the relevant paper work. In case you are not in possession of the documents concerned due to loss or theft, the agency will help you. The agency will contact the lender concerned and obtain the relevant documents through the official process. However, this requires the payment of an extra fee by the customer. If the agency finds that your case is genuine, it will take it up; however, if the agency dismisses your application on merit, you have the liberty to visit another agency, make sure they opperate a refund policy. The best advice is to make sure that you have a genuine case by cross checking the credit agreement details with the banking and credit regulations.
In an effort to make sure that the credit agreement has been executed with your full knowledge, the agency will carry out a study. In the case where you are fighting a losing battle, the agency will not be in your favour. So be it any kind of loan or credit agreement, the aggrieved customer has to be very clear about the issue.
This company list success case, visit http://angliacreditissues.wordpress.com/2008/11/08/unfair-credit-agreement-credit-issues-claim-further-success/
This is the policy of most of the banks that they try to afraid people and claim unnecessary bank charges.
Regulated Credit Card Agreements
Please read this email, it details why you do not have to repay your credit card balance. We have a test case going through the Court of Appeal which will not only set a precedent as to the enforceability of credit card agreements but also the legal status of default charges.
We are Mr & Mrs Basil and Amanda Rankine, we have taken and are at present being taken to court to challenge the enforceability or enforce our consumer credit agreements. There are six outstanding cases at the moment. We are both Independent Financial Advisors and have 20 years experience between us within the industry. After struggling with lenders since October 2004, disputing our agreements and attending over 30 county court hearings representing ourselves, we have been misled and mistreated by the courts and now we have decided enough is enough. We believe that it is in the public’s interest that we make consumers aware of our findings regarding the unenforceability of most credit agreements.
The lenders are prepared to lie in court and commit forgery by tampering with agreements in order to win in a case, we object to this and not as it may seem, to lenders trying to get their money back. We cannot accept that it is alright for them to break the law in order for them to avoid the consequences of their breaches of the law regarding the formation of regulated consumer credit agreements. From the very beginning lenders have used bully boy and psychological tactics in their debt collection tactics by sending letters every other day to debtors from different debt collectors and solicitors, telephone calls every day early in the morning or late at night, and threats to send collection agents to our homes. All of these things happen when you fall behind with payments and being a subject of them is very intimidating and contrary to the spirit of the guidelines, but are not actually in breach of them.
If you read the enclosed documents you will find out why you do not have to repay your credit card. Why are we the only people claiming the unenforceability of agreements? That was the very question we asked ourselves at the beginning, the answer is that no one else has looked into it in the detail that we have, and no one has put their neck on the line to prove the point. Lenders will usually do everything to settle before going to court, so the question has not successfully been put before a court of law until now.
What will this mean, as we are right? Other cases will ride on whether we succeed or fail in the Court of Appeal, the law is quite clear where regulated agreements are concerned and anyone can decide if their agreement is correct or if it is incorrect, you do not need a judge to decide that for you. Unfortunately the lenders rule the courts, judges do a very good job but very few are technically qualified to judge the validity of a regulated agreement and a lender has a lot more credibility in court than a debtor. Judges tend to make a moral judgment which is outside their remit and not one based on the law as it should be. This can be seen from the default charges fiasco which has been allowed to drag on for years, and people who have gone down the court route will confirm getting justice in court does not come as a right. We have spent a lot of time and money on trying to get judges to see the light but we are on an uphill struggle. We have been fighting this battle alone and we now want to give anyone in the same position the opportunity to join the fight and win, based on the principle that the law was written to protect us and lenders have hijacked the court system and are using it to oppress us.
There are many tragedies linked to the pressure of debt repayment, and although you might think lenders are the victims here there are many debtors who are victims without a voice or a system of which they can complain to. The strongest in society have a duty to protect the weakest, which is the basic and underlying principle in most families and in law. The financial stable cannot ignore the situation of the financially unstable, just because their situation was self made, personal circumstances can change without warning or blame. One thing that must not be forgotten, we are right in law, it is the lenders who have failed to follow the letter of the law. When food manufactures fail to follow food production laws we are all happy to condemn them and see that they are prosecuted, but if a financial company breaches the law effecting millions of consumers, people are silent as the effected, the indebted have no voice. There are many consumer organisations, half charities or government funded, however, I do not believe that all of these organisations who handle consumer debt every day, have not come across the unenforceability of credit agreements before, they have a duty to tell us what we now know.
Why are we protected in law and why can we not easily seek that legal protection in the courts?
Why are the elected and our representatives allowing lenders to get away with murder?
Why are lenders lending money without the legal right to get it back? It is not the lenders money they are lending, it is money invested or saved by normal people which may now be lost.
For comment or further information please contact us at admin@creditcardkiller.co.uk.
Yours indebted
Mr & Mrs Basil and Amanda Rankine
This document is not to be reproduced without consent of the originator.