Possible good news for NatWest customers

There could be some good news in the pipeline for customers of the bank, NatWest, if they have been trying to reclaim past overdraft charges that were applied to their accounts. Read more

Tags: natwest, high, bank accounts, andrew smith, overdraft, judge, bank, Natwest's 2001 charges

Bank may have equipment seized

A branch of the Abbey bank in Chorley, Manchester, has been threatened by bailiffs following its failure to adhere to a court order and repay past overdraft charges to a customer that took it to court.

Sam Umaar sued the Abbey over the repayment of illegal bank charges amounting to nearly £3000. However, despite a court order instructing the bank to make payment to the customer no action was taken.

Sam Umaar sued the Abbey over bank charges that amounted to £2493. These were charges that the bank had applied to his account for exceeding his overdraft limit – charges that have now been described as unlawful and unfair by financial regulators in the UK. Mr Umaar’s case went to court in June, and because the Abbey did not show up to defend itself the judge granted an additional £276 to Mr Umaar, bringing the total judgement to £2769.

However, despite the court order the Abbey still did not pay up, and now bailiffs have visited the branch and given officials seven days to pay up. If this is not done the bailiffs state that they will seize equipment to the value of the sum owed. This has been done in the past with other banks, where equipment such as computers, faxes, printers, and other office and banking equipment has been taken in order to make the bank pay up in accordance with the court order.

Mr Umaar stated: “It’s ludicrous that the Abbey haven’t paid up when they know they have to.”

He added: “The bailiff says I will get my money – it is just a matter of when.” Officials from the Abbey have stated that the cheque has now been issued to Mr Umaar, and that bailiffs have been notified of this.

Tom Smith
11th July 2007

Tags: abbey, unpaid, bailiffs, bank, judge

Charge Claimants Can Ask For Strike Outs

The campaign for people to reclaim excessive charges from banks has been hit by banks “playing the game” and stringing customers’ claims along until they are taken to court. More often than not, the banks then don’t turn up to court. Read more

Tags: charges, fair, legal, judge, claim, banks, abuse, lloyds

Bank charge court claims need to be watertight

Experts have warned that consumers that are trying to reclaim bank charges from their banks through the courts need to make sure that the case they are putting forward is solid and watertight in order to increase their chances of successfully reclaiming back the cash from the bank.

Apparently a number of claimants are failing to provide the right documentation or are failing to put forward their case properly, and this can increase the chances of the judge ruling in the bank’s favour.

Judges are becoming impatient with these cases, as there are many pending and blocking up the court system, and banks fail to turn up to defend themselves, which means that the claimant wins the case by default.

Experts claim that judges are now looking to get rid of what they describe as frivolous claims, and this could affect those that do not put forward a strong enough case or provide the necessary paperwork and documentation to support their claim.

Lloyds TSB has already won two cases, where the judges ruled in the bank’s favour rather than that of the claimant. A judge in Hull has also stated that he may strike out twenty claims against banks. Experts think that all of these lost of struck out cases could be the result of sloppily put together cases and inappropriate or inadequate documentation from the claimant.

Thousands of consumers have been claiming back charges from their banks going back up to six years, and these charges were applied for exceeding the overdraft limit on the account, as well as for returned direct debits and cheques. However, where banks have reduced to repay the full amount many have decided to file a small claim against the bank through the courts.

Tom Smith
30th June 2007

Tags: fees, order, defend, paperwork, judge, charges, court, cases, cost

Consumers outraged by judge’s bank charge decision

A number of consumers in the UK are outraged at the decision of a judge in Hull who plans to dismiss their court cases against a number of banks.

Around twenty customers who have taken their banks to court over reclaiming bank charges have been told that the cases are likely to be dismissed as a result of the recent case won by Lloyds TSB. Lloyds was the first bank to win a case, when the Birmingham judge ruled in the banks favour rather than in favour of the plaintiff, Kevin Berwick, who was seeking over £2500.

Despite officials from the Financial Ombudsman Service stating that the Lloyds TSB case is not a definitive one, the judge from Hull, Ian Besford, has cited this case in his decision to dismiss the cases against Lloyds TSB, Barclays, and HSBC. The cases are due to be heard on July 4th. A number of the consumers concerned have contacted the BBC with regards to the issue.

A spokesperson from Consumer Action Group stated: ‘Kevin Berwick lost in his case in Birmingham because he didn’t supply enough evidence. This judge in Hull seems to be striking out the claims before he has even seen the detailed evidence of each claimant.’

However, the judge has stated that he plans to dismiss the cases because there appears to be ‘no reasonable prospect of success in the light of the recent decision’ regarding the Lloyds TSB case.

This is the first judge to have referred to the Birmingham Lloyds TSB case in his decision. A court official from Hull stated: ‘It is entirely up to each judge to decide for himself if the Birmingham judgement is an interpretation of the law he agrees with.’

Tom Smith
12th June 2007

Tags: ruling, judge, penalties, claim, charges, fees, costs

Consider financial ombudsman over bank charges

In the ongoing disputes relating to bank charges Lloyds TSB recently became the first bank to win a court case against a customer that was trying to reclaim bank charges that had been imposed for exceeding the overdraft limit on the account, and for returned cheques and direct debits.

And is seems that this unprecedented case has started to put some consumers off from trying to reclaim charges from their banks. However, experts advise that there is another route available.

This is Money has advised consumers that if they don’t feel confident about taking their bank to court of reclaiming bank charged they can simply go through the Financial Ombudsman Service. This is a free service, so consumers will have nothing to lose by taking their complaints to the ombudsman. And if, at the end of the day, the consumer does not agree with the financial ombudsman’s decision he or she can still take the case to court.

This is Money also warns that this cannot be done the other way around. So if a consumer takes the bank to court, and the judge rules in favour of the bank, the consumer cannot then take the complaint to the financial ombudsman because the judge’s ruling has to be the final one. So, anyone having trouble getting bank charges back from their bank should consider complaining to the FOS before taking the case to court.

Even banks are now using the Lloyds RSB case to try and make consumers feel as though this is a definitive decision, but this is not the case.

One FOS spokesman stated: ‘We are seeing letters from banks suggesting the Birmingham case is definitive. This is usually happening at local branch level. Often when we raise it at a senior level, head office agrees that the letters are wrong and stop any more going out.’

Tom Smith
10th June 2007

Tags: charges, fines, court, bank, case, ombudsman

Banks warned by judge over unreasonable behaviour

A judge in the UK has issued a warning to banks in relation to unreasonable behaviour in cases where consumers try to claim back charges that have been deemed unlawful and unfair.

Many consumers in the UK have made claims for bank charges going back up to six years, and although in all cases but one the claims have been successful a number of banks have been acting in a manner deemed unreasonable, using retaliatory measured such as account closures to get back at the consumer.

And another tactic being used by some banks is the pretence that they will be defending claims in court, when in actual fact they have no intention of doing this at all.

It is this tactic that is being objected to by the High Court judge, David Mackie, who claims that the banks are wasting court time and resources with this pretence. He further stated that he was looking into awarding damages against the banks if they continued to do this in instances where a consumer has filed a claim in court.

The London Mercantile Court has had hundreds of these bank charge cases referred through lower courts this year, and the hope is that at some point one of the cases will be heard, producing a test decision.

Judge Mackie stated: “If the banks had won, many fewer customers would have sued. If the banks had lost, the claims would have been much easier to sort out than they are now.”

With banks deciding to settle the claim at the last minute before a case is heard, the likelihood of a test decision is a slim one.

Judge Mackie added: “On the face of things each case raises serious issues which the court would permit to proceed to trial. But this is fantasy because, at least for the moment, we all know that there will be no trial.”

Tom Smith
30th May 2007

Tags: penalties, charges, bank, lose, account, challenge