Posts
In the case of Sharp v. Bank of Scotland, the defender applied to remit the case to the ordinary court procedure. As our client is eligible for civil legal aid this was not a problem (legal aid is not available for small claims in Scotland, but it is for ordinary cause actions). However, we may oppose this in other cases where appropriate, and will disseminate this knowledge if successful. Accordingly, the case of Sharp will proceed to an Options Hearing next month, and it is likely a 'debate' (a court hearing on all of the legal arguments) will take place shortly thereafter. This is necessary because the banks defence to a s.140A Consumer Credit Act (CCA) claim is to argue that the banking contract was not a regulated credit agreement. The banks are also arguing that claims cannot go back before 6 April 2007.
Accordingly, if we can persuade the court that these lines of defence are irrelevant and wrong in law, this would leave claims to be determined on the facts as regards the unfair relationship test and the level of unfairness and consumer detriment. Of course, in many cases the level of unfairness is severe. Because cases depend so much on their own facts under the CCA - whether in terms of the transitional arrangements or the unfair relationship test - there may be little point in cases being sisted or stayed. Each case is different, and under the CCA each case is looked at specifically between the parties, the contract between them and the consequences of the charges on that customer.
GLC will post further updates, but we are unable to make too much detail public at this stage as cases are live, and we cannot prejudice the prospects of our clients.
Does this mean that any decision will create a legal 'precedent'
ReplyDeleteNo, only the decision of a higher court can do that, in the sense of a formal legal precedent that binds other courts. But if we can persuade a court to rule the banks new lines of defences are irrelevant or incompetent in law, that will mean it is possible to claim back unfair charges; and the know-how on how to do this will be disseminated by GLC in the public interest, so UK citizens can obtain redress. This isn't easy, but it's possible.
ReplyDeleteWell done so far GLC. Thousands of us are "banking" on you. Good luck next month. Will you let us know when an exact date has been fixed and where the case will be heard?
ReplyDeleteDo you expect the case to last several hours, days, weeks or months?
What date next month will the hearing take place?
ReplyDeleteWhat date is the proposed hearing next month?
ReplyDeleteI want to commend GLC for the courage in pursuing this case. It is very uncommon for UK law firms to fight to support UK consumers. I salute your support for citizens' justice. On behalf of millions of UK consumers, THANK YOU very much.
ReplyDeleteAgree wholeheartedly! Great work GLC, perhaps history in the making and the long awaited balance restored between the bankers and the everyday person.
ReplyDeleteIs this case still going forward?
ReplyDeleteVery interesting to hear what the banks defences are Mike, considering its generally assumed that the unfair relationship applies to any agreement and not just regulated agreements. Even the interpretation section of this defines any credit agreement as any agreement between an individual (the debtor) and the creditor, who provides the debtor with credit of any amount. And the only exemption it expressly make in S141 is in relation agreements secured by land mortgages Are they, therefore, arguing it only applies to regulated agreements? Also S14 of Schedule 3 makes it sort of clear the unfair relationship test can be used for agreements entered in to before the commencement of the unfair relationship test. So I take it they are saying it cant?
ReplyDeleteThis case looks like it could be very significant not only in relation to bank charges, but also the operation of the unfair relationship test. It seems they are challenging what to date has been assumed understood.
Looks like it will be interesting.
Mike I too wish to add my good wishes to the work you are doing in this matter. Having been before a court with regard to credit card charges, the consumer faces an uphill battle.
ReplyDeleteI and others I have been in contact with and have recently raised these points with the Nationwide and they refuse to accept either argument. They are also forgetting they have a slightly different position being a mutual.
Best of luck next month and will be watching with interest.
My company represents bank charge claims for over 2000 people and have done since early 2007 and continued since the stay in July 2007 and even after the Supreme Court ruling we cannot justify closing these files. The banks are wrong and courts should make an example of them. They constantly flout the law and twist regulations to their advantage often leaving people without through large and unecessary charges.
ReplyDeleteWhilst the OFT and the banks were at court it was disgraceful that banks could continue to levy these charges, and even to date a lot of the banks 'have plans' for reducing charges ? And why are the courts not putting some faith back in peoples hearts by bringing serious cases like this forward as quickly as possible, after all, the courts have made enough money to date out of this and it seems the only people who are suffering and not getting justice is those who the whole battle is for.
And we know most of our clients will get their refund in one hand and the banks have the other hand out for it so it is only an exercise on paper - with justice and pride restored.
Can anyone let me know what stage this case is at. I last heard that the case would continue with an Options Hearing in July and there are only 4 days left. Thanks.
ReplyDeletei feel that this is leading to agreat disappointment for all of us. If someone started a peoples bank out of principle i would transfer my wages to that bank and hope every other person i the UK would do the same and send the banks tumbling!
ReplyDeletePlease can you advise when the SharpvBOS case is due to be heard?
ReplyDeletePlease GLC - when will the Sharp case be heard?
ReplyDeleteThe court has appointed a two day 'debate' in the Sharp case i.e. a hearing on the legal arguments. The date is awaited, but is expected to take place in the next few weeks. GLC is also pursuing other unfair bank charges test cases - we will post information on these as soon as possible.
ReplyDeleteWas a date ever set for the two day debate?
ReplyDeleteIf so, has it taken place yet and if so what was the outcome?
Any information on the other unfair bank charges test cases yet, please?
In Southend County Court there is an ongoing case, due to be heard before a circuit judge in March next year.
ReplyDelete