Judgement in on historics - Natwest 2001-2003 terms could be deemed penalties

[Shazzaw]

COMMERCIAL COURT LIST
COURT 76
Before MR JUSTICE ANDREW SMITH
Wednesday 21 January 2009
At 10:00
FOR JUDGMENT
2007-1186 Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC


Just noticed this !!!!!!!!! ANy news EXC???

[Paule]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Well Spotted

[ROBSTER]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Probably the outstanding declaration on behalf of NatWest that their charges can not be tested as penalties. This was due out before Christmas.

The appeal judges decision is due next (by the end of Jan 09) and FSA review of waiver is on Monday.

Lots happening !

[EXC]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

The main declaration on historicals was simply published in the form of a sealed order. Interesting that this will be handed down in a hearing.

[Smasher]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Whatever the judgement, this is still only 1 principle. I'm still determined to go after them on misrepresentation!

[Shazzaw]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Does anyone know where will hear news of tomorrows hearing as without EXc / Budgie attending I guess we won't know??

Will the OFT confirm anything if Joe Public was to give them a call tomorrow??

[pinknico]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

From the OFT website hope its ok to post it over here?
20 January 2009

The handing down of judgment in relation to whether certain banks' historical charging terms are capable of amounting to penalties at common law will take place at the High Court, Court 76, at 10:00 on 21 January.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

its the last fiddly bits of the judgement that Justice Smith has to give...

[Shazzaw]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Thanks for the post Nico and at east we know that the hearing tomorrow is confirmed that it's regarding the banks historical terms.

Apologies in advance for my ignorance but I'm assuming that the best we could hope for is that YES the historical terms are capable of amounting to penalties but my guess is that it's unlikely as current terms were not deemed to be penalties.

However, if tomorrows decision advices that historical terms cannot be deemed as penalties it's not the end of the road as the OFT can still investigate under UTCCR??

Is there any decison tomorrow that could call to an end to all of us hoping for our stayed claims?

Any advices from anyone would be greatly appreciated.

thx
shazzaw

[natweststaffmember]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Sorry Shazzaw, but most of the historicals have been done already but there was some addtional issues.
However, there were some terms the judge found he could not make a ruling on. These terms were Abbey’s May 2005 conditions relating to its Instant Plus account, HBOS’ Intelligence Finance accounts, Lloyds TSB’s terms and RBSG’s terms. The judge will hear further submissions on 9 December 2008 on Abbey’s May 2005 terms, and the terms of Lloyds TSB and RBSG.
Source: Unauthorised overdraft charges : FSA Money made clear – News

------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
It stems from the above that leads us to the decision tomorrow.

[Budgie]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Have just seen this, I will try and get there tomorrow morning for the handing down.

Budgie

[Smasher]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Lots of letter templates will need changing today either way.. :yawn:

[Amethyst]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

The judgement was mainly sorted out at the last hearing although RBS still had some submissions to make etc so I don't think there is anything suprising or exciting to come from it, however it wil be interesting the breakdown of things. We pretty much know charges aren't being deemed as penalties, if one bank is suddenly deemed penalties then they'll appeal. The appeal judgement on the UTCCR issues will be the interesting one.

[Amethyst]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Yes, maybe friday? before waiver review be nice.

[ROBSTER]

Re: Judgement in on historics????

Re UTCCR
Am I right in suggesting that the Appeal Judges indicated they would give their response by the end of January 2009?