Brennan's Valiant Fight Against NatWest
The bank charges hearing is over. Read Neil Faulkner's summary and verdict.
I've just finished watching the third and final day of the application hearing for Tom Brennan vs. NatWest, the widely reported unfair bank charges case.It's been a mammoth battle. Weapons used by the parties include the Office of Fair Trading's upcoming report into charges, some House of Lords rulings, a case regarding the supply of oil to Southern Rhodesia, European Directives, Austrian legislation, the Brussels Convention, the Treaty of Rome and even the Geneva Convention.Tom Brennan did amazingly well. He's just one year qualified, it's not his area of law and he's up against a major bank's six-person legal team, including a senior and very experienced barrister.I must say that since I wrote about the first day of the hearing, I've cooled to the judge considerably. I have mentioned my own concerns with Brennan's unusual case previously. Even so, the pressure was piled very strongly on him in lots of other ways.One example of many is that the judge showed him no favour as a litigant-in-person (meaning that he was given no leeway for representing himself and for not being trained in this area of law), choosing instead to treat him equally with NatWest's team.Unlike many judges in the country, the judge did not show any prior knowledge of these claims, despite the fact there are hundreds of thousands of them. (It's possible that he doesn't know what a website is.)Seeing the case unfold, I think the odds are stacked against Brennan. But he has fought hard and well. Incredibly well. However this case goes, he should feel proud of what is an awesome performance under very tough circumstances.The broader implicationsThe judge agreed vigorously with Ben Pilling, barrister for NatWest, when he said that a term that's unfair for one customer might not be unfair to others. I hope that beneath that vigour was the common sense to understand that yes, a term in a consumer contract might be unfair to one person only, but in the case of this term in what is a standard contract, it must surely be equally unfair to everyone who has the same contract with NatWest.That's why the judge said that he didn't believe that this claim could help other consumers. Reassuringly for other claimants though, the reverse should be true. Pilling said that 'The interests of consumers will not be damaged if this claim is struck out.'The important thing to remember is that Brennan's is totally different to the claims the rest of you are doing, for many reasons. Most people's claims are much more straightforward. But you still must take your claims seriously! Heed the moral in Lloyds Bank Wins Bank Charges Case.The court has told me that the judge estimates he will need six weeks to come up with his judgment. Read about what the consequences of his decision will be in Bank Charges Hearing: The Consequences.All articles relating to Tom Brennan vs. NatWest:Bank Charges Hearing: The Consequences, 11 May 2007Bank Charges Court Update, 1 May 2007The Fool Talks To Bank Charges Crusader, 20 April 2007The First Bank Charges Court Hearing, 12 April 2007-05-22Money Talk: Landmark Illegal Bank Charge Court Case, 19 April 2007> Read The Ultimate Guide To Reclaiming Bank Charges.> Compare current accounts.