[an error occurred while processing this directive]
BBC News
watch One-Minute World News
Last Updated: Saturday, 7 April 2007, 04:06 GMT 05:06 UK
Court bid for bank charge ruling
By Paul Lewis
BBC Radio 4's Money Box

Barrister Tom Brennan
Barrister Tom Brennan believes bank penalty charges are illegal
A high street bank may be forced to justify its penalty charges in court for the first time.

No judge has ever ruled on whether charges of 30 or more to bounce a payment are legal as the banks have always paid up to prevent court action.

But a barrister now believes he can force the issue to court and is seeking a key ruling on Friday.

He is demanding the right to claim damages on top of a refund and has rejected an offer to settle the action.

Tom Brennan, who ran up 2,500 in penalties on an unauthorised overdraft when he was a law student, told BBC Radio 4's Money Box what he is asking the court.

"I am arguing for what are called 'exemplary damages'. Where a company acts unlawfully and then takes unlawful profits from a person they should face a substantial level of damages to strip them of those profits," he said.

He shares the view of many consumer groups that the charges levied by banks when people exceed their overdraft limit or a payment is bounced are illegal.

"Consumer protection regulations state clearly that you can't charge a disproportionate level of charges for any breach of contract," he said.

"The information I have from my experts it that it will cost 2.50 or thereabouts to bounce a direct debit. The bank charges me 38."

Consumer action

Major campaigns by consumer groups have led to tens of thousands of people recovering bank charges.

More than two million form letters have been downloaded from one website alone.

In every case the banks eventually pay up - sometimes at the court steps - so the legality of the charges has never been tested.

They've offered me 4,000 but I've rejected it
Tom Brennan, barrister

Mr Brennan says his approach will force NatWest to defend its actions in court.

He has refused an offer well in excess of the penalty charges taken by the bank.

"They've offered me 4,000 but I've rejected it because they keep saying the charges are both fair and lawful but I don't agree," he said.

If the court rules against him he could pay a heavy price.

"If I lose and they state that I am acting unreasonably they can ask for their costs," he said.

"They are employing senior barristers. It would bankrupt me, and that prevents you being a practising barrister or transferring to be a solicitor.

"But that will only happen if the judge awards costs and he may not if he decides I am bringing this for public reasons. This case has a momentum of its own and is too important to walk away."

In a statement, NatWest confirmed that the case was being defended but "it would be inappropriate to comment further".

The case will be heard on Friday, 13 April in the Mayor's and City of London County Court at Guildhall.

BBC Radio 4's Money Box will be broadcast on Saturday 7 April 2007 at 1204 BST.

The programme will be repeated on Sunday, 8 April at 2102 BST.



VIDEO AND AUDIO NEWS
Why one man is testing the legality of bank charges



Money Box


SEARCH MONEY BOX:
 

Podcast

Download or subscribe to this programme's podcast

Podcast Help



SEE ALSO
How to claim back penalty charges
13 Dec 06 |  Business
Study launched into bank charges
29 Mar 07 |  Business
Success for bank charge claimants
23 Mar 07 |  Business
Do the banks have a guilty secret?
15 Mar 07 |  Business

RELATED INTERNET LINKS
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites


FEATURES, VIEWS, ANALYSIS
Has China's housing bubble burst?
How the world's oldest clove tree defied an empire
Why Royal Ballet principal Sergei Polunin quit

PRODUCTS & SERVICES

Americas Africa Europe Middle East South Asia Asia Pacific