British Banks Win 'Stunning' Victory in Landmark Ruling on Overdraft Fees
High street banks won a 'stunning' victory at the Supreme Court today in a dispute over overdraft fees that lands a blow to thousands of customers who hoped to recoup charges.
That is the headline from the Telegraph today.
This story makes me wonder, is the new Supreme Court free from political interference?
The reason i am asking is that if the banks lost today they would have to pay back £1 billion and would of lost £2.6 billion in lost revenue. Now as we, the tax payer, own some of the banks we would of had to fork out more money to the banks to cover the lost revenue.
Another thing, i was just checking my email before and i don't know if it is just a coincidence, but i received an email from my bank with a change in my terms and conditions.
In the new terms and conditions there is a section about bank charges and how and when they will charge you.
It didn't take them long to send the new terms and conditions out.
Did the banks have prior knowledge of what the supreme court ruling would be?
Or did they have 2 versions of the new terms and conditions ready to send out?
No comments:
Post a Comment