Sunday 26 June 2011

Supplementary Note - Forum Related

A number of consumer forums in the UK have allowed links to this blog to be given to their members, others are allowing extracts to be posted.

Those reading these posts, but not arriving here from those forums, will find my reference (in the post immediately above) to a recent Court ruling in the UK, and its importance, insufficiently explained.

This is a note I posted on those forums (Yes - I know it's fora - but fora as opposed to forums still just sounds wrong to me).

It is supplementary to this blog - but I hope will explain the reference and keep things in context

********************


I have three more posts similar to those above to add to the blog.

They are repetitive in nature. I will not post extracts (as above) on here for that reason - but I will post the links to the last three items once they are added to the blog so that those interested can see the details for themselves.

For those reading these items. I should explain that since the blog was started last year, and before the Supreme Court decision, its existence and details have been made known to the FSA, the OFT, the Treasury Select Committee and others - including MSE Guy and Mike Dailly.

Contact with those bodies has continued as the blog has developed, and this week I issued a further series of e-mails to those bodies and this week added the FOS to the list.

Why the FOS, and only now? 

In each of the above examples, and the ones I have yet to add to the blog, I am building a "body of evidence", which demonstrate the powers and effectiveness of the FSA, based not solely on the "Rules" which they enforce, but also on the "Principles" that they require to be followed by each party that they authorise.

Why is that important? Those that have a detailed knowledge of the recent Court ruling on the BBA case against the FSA over PPI - will know that s 150 of the Financial Services and Markets Act was central to the eventual ruling.

More importantly - in those legal arguments a hugely important distinction was drawn by the judge in that eventual ruling over the application of s 150 as it applied to the FSA and to the FOS. There is a difference - a crucial one - that separates the FSA and the FOS over issues of fairness and reasonableness - and that is where the blog is heading.

That distinction has a vital role to play in this whole matter of the fairness or otherwise of bank charges - and the "body of evidence" I am building in the blog will, I hope, play its part in having that distinction and its importance recognised.

Once I have completed the next set of posts - still painstakingly listing that evidence - I will then move onto an analysis of that Court ruling on PPI - and show its application to the question of bank charges.

I will post extracts here when they are posted on the blog.



*****************************



No comments :

Post a Comment