Possession insurance more common than life insurance

More Britons insure their possessions than their own life, according to recent research from Legal & General.

A full 66 per cent of those surveyed said they had house insurance, but just 41 per cent said that they had taken out life insurance, the survey found.

Additionally, while 22 per cent of respondents reported having insurance for their mobile phones, 17 per cent had critical illness cover.

Bonnie Burns, Legal & General’s protection product marketing director said: “The nation’s priorities seem misguided, with people more worried about losing their mobile than about how they would cope financially if they had a critical illness.

“We all know that it is difficult to face up to our own mortality, but when insuring possessions is prioritised above insuring lives, then something has to be done.”

In 2005-06, a total of 212 workers were killed in accidents, according to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.

Tags: business, legal, total, percentage, Possession insurance, critical illness, mobile phones, Financial services

Bank charge test case may be dropped

According to a recent report the Office of Fair Trading is considering dropping the test case over bank charges, which was planned for next year.

The test case was designed to make a final determination over bank charges following months of controversy and rows between banks and consumers. The battle started after campaigners and regulators branded the charges, applied for exceeding overdraft limits, bounding cheques, and returned direct debits, unlawful and unfair.

Officials from the Office of Fair Trading have confirmed that there is a chance that the test case will be dropped, but this will only happen if it is in the best interests of the consumer.

Officials stated that they may consider dropping the test case if banks decide to cut their charges to a level that makes them fair to consumers. Lloyds TSB has already cut its charges, but many experts state that it has not cut them enough.

One OFT official stated: “If we do our own financial analysis, and they come in with a number that is lower than our analysis would suggest is an unfair charge, there is no need for the court case to go forward. We will be looking out for what is the best outcome for the consumer.”

However, the banks are arguing that their bank charges have nothing to do with the OFT, and that officials have no power over their bank charges. The OFT is due to review charges to come up with a figure that it believes is fair.

If the test case does go ahead, many experts think that free banking could come to an end in the UK and that banks will start charging monthly fees for having a current account to recoup losses from bank charges.

Tom Smith
16th October 2007

Tags: trading, test, fees, bank, charges, drop, fair, legal, oft, case

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: strike, banks, claim, consumers, fair

Young buyers mortgage illiterate

Many first-time buyers are mortgage illiterate, according to new research by AA Legal Services.

Those looking to get their first mortgage on a property are confused by certain terms and may not be completely aware of what it is that they are buying.

The research found that 40 per cent of new buyers do not know the difference between a leasehold and freehold property, with those aged between 18 and 24 being the worst offenders.

AA Legal Services has expressed concerns that many young people are feeling the pressure of rising house prices and this may be forcing them into getting onto the property ladder without fully understanding what they are signing up to.

First-time buyers spend an average of £159,653 on their first property but 41 per cent have no idea what freehold means and 43 per cent are clueless as to the meaning of leasehold.

“Our research suggests that many homebuyers are so desperate to get onto the property ladder that they may be over looking vitally important basic legal principals,” commented James Molloy head of AA Legal Services.

The term leasehold means the right to hold or use a property for a fixed period of time according to a contract. However, many 18-24-year-olds thought it meant that the property could be rented out and others believed that it made the house exempt from council tax.

Freehold means that there is no limit to how long the property can be held and remains with the holder until he or she willingly transfers it. Six per cent of 18-24-year-olds thought freehold meant exempt from capital gains tax, while two per cent thought that only freemasons could buy freehold properties.

Tags: pressure, leasehold, property ladder, Many first-time buyers, difference, legal, first mortgage

Bank accused of wasting court’s time

One of the leading UK banks has been accused of wasting time by a judge, and has been ordered to pay the court costs of a woman that sued the bank after trying to reclaim unfair and unlawful charges that the bank had applied to her account for going overdrawn, returned cheques, and unpaid direct debits.

Lloyds TSB will have to pay court costs of £85.41 after the Bristol County Court judge, Andrew Kearney, accused the bank of ‘acting unreasonably’.

The plaintiff, Vivien Lloyd, had tried to reclaim fees that amounted to £655, but wrote to the judge after the bank spent a year wasting time before offering to refund the fees. The judge stated that the bank had no intention of defending its charges in court, and therefore accused the bank of wasting time and ordered it to pay the court costs incurred by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff had initially written to Lloyds TSB in March 2006 to reclaim her charges, many of which had been accrued by her son, Gary.

She stated: “The terrible stress it put me through – it was driving me mad. I’m absolutely ecstatic – it was our living money, our food money.”

She added that the bank had continued to refuse the refund until earlier this year, with just one week to go before the court hearing, at which point Lloyds offered her a full refund of charges. 

A spokesperson for the bank stated:  “We are surprised by this judgement as we firmly believe we have the right to lodge a defense in any legal action brought against us. We have been unable to trace any notification from the court about this application for a further payment of £85 and so did not have an opportunity to challenge it before it was made.”

Tom Smith
4th May 2007

Tags: legal, court, defense, unfair, bank, year, claim, charges, appeal, refund