How did the UK Supreme Court ruling come down about bank overdrafts?
From foxbusiness.com: U.K. Banks Win Court Ruling On Overdraft Fees LONDON — The U.K.’s Supreme Court on Wednesday unexpectedly ruled in favor of the banking sector in a long-running case over the legality of overdraft charges. The case was brought by the Office of Fair Trading after thousands of consumers demanded refunds on the charges they had paid banks for going overdrawn without prior agreement. The OFT wanted to investigate whether overdraft charges were fair, but the court ruled that the OFT cannot challenge the charges because they are part of the price paid in exchange for banking services. However, the court also said it wasn’t ruling on whether the charges themselves were fair. Sources: http://www.foxbusiness.
Britain’s Supreme Court rules in favour of banks on Wednesday in a test case triggered by consumers demanding relief for steep overdraft charges. Britain’s Supreme Court ruled in favour of banks on Wednesday in a test case triggered by consumers demanding relief for steep overdraft charges. The court ruled that the charges should not be subject to regulation by a government agency, the Office of Fair Trading. Overdrafts allow customers to take out more money than they have, racking up a negative balance up to a limit set by the bank. Banks charge fees of up to £35 ($A63) each time the limit is exceeded, and charge interest. The consumer group Which? led a campaign encouraging people to reclaim the charges. Lower courts ruled in favour of the consumers, but the Supreme Court agreed with the banks’ argument that the charges were part of a package agreed by customers when they took out a bank account. “The banks may not be the most popular institutions in the country at present, but that
Britain’s Supreme Court ruled in favour of banks on Wednesday in a test case triggered by consumers demanding relief for steep overdraft charges. The court ruled that the charges should not be subject to regulation by a government agency, the Office of Fair Trading. Overdrafts allow customers to take out more money than they have, racking up a negative balance up to a limit set by the bank. Banks charge fees of up to £35 ($A63) each time the limit is exceeded, and charge interest. The consumer group Which? led a campaign encouraging people to reclaim the charges. Lower courts ruled in favour of the consumers, but the Supreme Court agreed with the banks’ argument that the charges were part of a package agreed by customers when they took out a bank account. Sources: http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/british-banks-win-supreme-court-t
Related Questions
- Does the Bush campaign have any additional avenues to challenge the ruling of the Florida Supreme Court that the manual recount results should be included in the final counts?
- Will Tobacco Personal Injury Lawsuits Ignite Following Recent California Supreme Court Ruling?
- How did the UK Supreme Court ruling come down about bank overdrafts?
