OFT launches test case on unauthorised overdraft charges
Retail banks face legal ruling on unfair bank charges
The UK Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has begun proceedings in the High Court claiming that unauthorised overdraft charges are unfair to consumers. The OFT believes the unfairness rules of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations applies in these cases, and is seeking to establish this legal principle in court. Aside from its belief that such charges are unfair, the OFT decided to act now because it found it was not able to secure voluntary compliance.
The motion is hotly contested by UK retail banks – namely Abbey National, Barclays Bank, Clydesdale Bank, HBOS, HSBC, Lloyds TSB, Royal Bank of Scotland and Nationwide Building Society. However, regardless of the tens of thousands of claims banks have received over unfair bank charges, they have usually settled rather than forcing the matter to court.
The test case will force clarity on the issue once and for all. While the case is ongoing, the UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) has allowed banks to suspend dealing with any claims for repayment of overdraft charges filed against them until a decision has been made. But the banks will be required to retain a log of any complaints made in the interim, and will be forced to honour any settlements made before the FSA’s waiver was announced.
The test case complements the OFT’s ongoing market study into personal current accounts, which addresses wider questions about competition and price transparency in the provision of personal current accounts that was announced in March 2007. The OFT will continue to work closely with the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Financial Services Authority, in addition to consulting with banks and consumer groups. It will publish its findings by the end of the year.
Should the OFT be successful, it could mean the end of free banking, as banks attempt to recoup costs from elsewhere.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Ruled out: can regulators settle the pre-hedging debate?
Market participants are at odds over the practice and whether regulation or principles can settle the score
SEC streamlines overhaul of stock trading rules
Tick size and access fee rules simplified from first draft, but Peirce still questions rationale
Supervisors use generative AI to tame ‘chaotic’ data
Officials merge credit databases with unstructured reports to sharpen bank oversight, explains Banco de España ex-deputy
EU banks fear loss of NSFR repo relief
European Commission must decide by next June; other jurisdictions adopted softer calibration
Running the numbers on Barr’s Basel III endgame revisions
Fed vice-chair’s plan to ease capital requirements for big banks still lacks critical details
Endgame manoeuvre: US banks put SLR reform back in spotlight
Plan to ease Basel III brings renewed focus to impact of leverage ratio on US Treasury market
Regulators want to fix AT1s. Investors want restraint
Tweaking the instrument that regulators love to hate may be the only way to prevent its abolition
More disclosure touted to temper pre-hedging ills
Transparency could help investors choose a dealer, but will they use the disclosures?