OFT drops legal challenge to bank charges

Published on

Following the Supreme Court’s judgment last month, the OFT is not to take further any more legal action over unarranged overdraft charges and the wider personal current account market.

The Supreme Court found that unarranged overdraft charging terms in the contracts considered are not assessable in full under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (‘UTCCRs’).

After detailed consideration of the judgment and of the various options available to it, the OFT has concluded that any investigation it were to continue into the fairness of current unarranged overdraft charging terms under the UTCCRs would have a very limited scope and low prospects of success. Given this, it has decided against taking forward such an investigation.

The OFT nevertheless continues to have significant concerns about the operation of the market for personal current accounts. Despite some recent and planned improvements by banks, particularly around transparency and customer switching, it believes fundamental changes are still required for the market to work in the best interests of bank customers. Banks earn around a third of their personal current account revenues from unarranged overdraft charges that are difficult to understand, not transparent and not subject to effective consumer control, the OFT claims.

A number of options are available to secure the changes that the OFT wants to see, ranging from voluntary action to legislative change.The OFT will now discuss these issues intensively with banks, consumer groups and other organisations, with the aim of reporting on progress by the end of March 2010.

The OFT’s decision not to continue its investigation into banks’ unarranged overdraft charging terms under the UTCCRs as a result of the Supreme Court judgment followed extensive consideration of the issues including discussions with consumer groups, campaigners, banks, the Government, the Financial Services Authority and Financial Ombudsman Service.

Consumers with complaints about bank charges should look at advice available from the FSA and FOS on their websites.

John Fingleton, OFT chief executive, said: “The Supreme Court judgment was not the outcome we had hoped for and was disappointing for many bank customers. Having now considered in detail all the options available to us in light of the judgment

COMMENT ON MORTGAGE SOUP

We want to hear from you!
Leave a comment and get the conversation started.
You need to register to post, so please login or sign up below.

Latest articles

Leeds launches 98% LTV mortgage aimed at widening access for first-time buyers

Leeds Building Society has introduced a new 98% loan-to-value mortgage designed to help more...

Uinsure secures exclusive Lloyds Bank General Insurance panel deal for advisers

Uinsure has added Lloyds Bank General Insurance to its home insurance panel in an...

Clydesdale cuts selected residential product transfer rates

Clydesdale Bank is reducing a range of residential product transfer fixed mortgage rates from...

Foundation shows how revised Property Plus criteria unlock Scottish buy-to-let purchase

Foundation has highlighted how enhancements to its Property Plus proposition helped a broker secure...

HLPartnership sets out leadership transition as Chris Tanner steps back

HLPartnership has announced plans for a leadership transition that will see BetterHome Group chief...

Latest publication

Other news

The AI questions the mortgage industry needs to ask – and address

Everyone in the industry is talking about artificial intelligence, but mortgage tech boss Zahid...

Leeds launches 98% LTV mortgage aimed at widening access for first-time buyers

Leeds Building Society has introduced a new 98% loan-to-value mortgage designed to help more...

Uinsure secures exclusive Lloyds Bank General Insurance panel deal for advisers

Uinsure has added Lloyds Bank General Insurance to its home insurance panel in an...