OFT "fought case on wrong legal grounds" say campaigners
By Kati Dijane, 2nd December 2009
The economic regulator has been accused of failing bank
customers who battled to reclaim billions of pounds of unfair bank
charges, after it lost its case against the banks in the
Supreme Court.
Campaigners have said that the Office of Fair Trading (OFT)
fought the bank charges campaign on the wrong legal grounds -
leaving more than one million consumers' bank charges claims with a
slimmer chance of succeeding.
In its ruling, the court hinted that the OFT may be able to
assess bank charges under other legal criteria, and campaigners
said that while this offered a ray of hope to customers it also
showed an immense error.
The OFT had based its case on the disproportionality of bank
charges before the court decided to rule in the banks' favour.
Martin Lewis, creator of MoneySavingExpert.com, said that the
case should have been fought on the grounds that contracts with the
banks are not negotiated individually so they must be in good faith
and not cause a significant imbalance to the detriment of the
consumer.
The OFT denied they had fought the case on the wrong legal
grounds and said previous hearings in the bank charges case at
the Court of Appeal and the High Court had ruled in their
favour.
The Financial Services Authority and the OFT have confirmed that
they will work together to establish a fair charging structure for
banks. However these changes will only apply on future cases and
not help those with existing outstanding bank charges.
Details of the new structure are expected to be announced
during December.
Consumers who have already received bank charges refunds will not
have to repay them as a result of the ruling.
Claims Financial
Testimonial
"I just had to put pen to paper and write to say I'm more than delighted with my settlement that you won me back from my PPI I had with Lloyds TSB. The Claim Forms were simple to fill in. It was a breeze"
Mr R Evans 11 Nov 2010