Supreme Court rules in favour of banks
Consumers' hopes of clawing back billions of pounds in charges appear to have been dashed by the Supreme Court, which has ruled in favour of the banks. The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) had hoped to be allowed to consider what constituted a fair bank charge. A ruling in its favour would have potentially cost the banks billions of pounds. The OFT had previously been told it could investigate the fairness of charges for unauthorised overdrafts, but this ruling has been overturned. Over a million consumers have cases pending but their hopes of being refunded overdraft charges appear to have been dashed. Many more had been expected to make claims if the case had gone against the banks. Lord Phillips, president of the Supreme Court said consumers had agreed to pay overdraft charges as part of having a current account. He did offer a glimmer of hope, however, saying the OFT could investigate charges under other legislation. "The shock decision by the Supreme Court is going to leave some consumers even more disillusioned with banks. Consumers have seen billions of pounds pumped into a number of banks, but many feel they have seen little benefit," commented Michelle Slade, spokesperson for Moneyfacts.co.uk. The British Banking Association said: "We recognise this issue has been of real concern to a large number of our customers and we are pleased that this decision now brings clarity for all parties."