<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Unfair Bank Charges UK &#187; supreme</title>
	<atom:link href="http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/tag/supreme/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:50:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Consumers win back £284m over mis-selling &#8211; This is Money</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/520/consumers-win-back-284m-over-mis-selling-this-is-money</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/520/consumers-win-back-284m-over-mis-selling-this-is-money#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 08:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/520/consumers-win-back-284m-over-mis-selling-this-is-money</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This flood was created by the end of a waiver that had allowed banks to put on hold all bank charges complaints. When the waiver was removed after a Supreme Court decision, banks became obliged to deal with the complaints they had already received.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This flood was created by the end of a waiver that had allowed banks to put on hold all bank charges complaints. When the waiver was removed after a Supreme Court decision, banks became obliged to deal with the complaints they had already received.</p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=504258&amp;in_page_id=2&amp;ct=5" title="Consumers win back £284m over mis-selling - This is Money">Consumers win back £284m over mis-selling &#8211; This is Money</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/520/consumers-win-back-284m-over-mis-selling-this-is-money/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cash Isa rates show why loyalty doesn&#8217;t pay &#8211; Daily Telegraph</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/441/cash-isa-rates-show-why-loyalty-doesnt-pay-daily-telegraph</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/441/cash-isa-rates-show-why-loyalty-doesnt-pay-daily-telegraph#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claim bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[overdrafts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reclaiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/441/cash-isa-rates-show-why-loyalty-doesnt-pay-daily-telegraph</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[... short supply and criteria are tight; interest rates on personal loans, credit cards and overdrafts have increased; the banks won their Supreme Court case against the OFT on bank charges and the subsequent report into bank fees was lukewarm.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; short supply and criteria are tight; interest rates on personal loans, credit cards and overdrafts have increased; the banks won their Supreme Court case against the OFT on bank charges and the subsequent report into bank fees was lukewarm.</p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/comment/paulfarrow/7546815/Cash-Isa-rates-show-why-loyalty-doesnt-pay.html" title="Cash Isa rates show why loyalty doesn't pay - Daily Telegraph">Cash Isa rates show why loyalty doesn&#8217;t pay &#8211; Daily Telegraph</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/441/cash-isa-rates-show-why-loyalty-doesnt-pay-daily-telegraph/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bank overdraft charges face new legal attack &#8211; BBC Business</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/369/bank-overdraft-charges-face-new-legal-attack-bbc-business-2</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/369/bank-overdraft-charges-face-new-legal-attack-bbc-business-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[centre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[govan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[overdraft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reclaiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/369/bank-overdraft-charges-face-new-legal-attack-bbc-business-2</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In November, the Supreme Court ruled that the scale of bank charges could not be challenged as unfair under consumer contract rules. But a client of the Govan Law Centre has won the right to challenge the Bank of Scotland's overdraft charges under ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In November, the Supreme Court ruled that the scale of bank charges could not be challenged as unfair under consumer contract rules. But a client of the Govan Law Centre has won the right to challenge the Bank of Scotland&#8217;s overdraft charges under &#8230;</p>
<p>Continued here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8528209.stm" title="Bank overdraft charges face new legal attack - BBC Business">Bank overdraft charges face new legal attack &#8211; BBC Business</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/369/bank-overdraft-charges-face-new-legal-attack-bbc-business-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Banks’ fees victory spurs Foxtons appeal – report &#8211; Euro News</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/282/banks%e2%80%99-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-%e2%80%93-report-euro-news-2</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/282/banks%e2%80%99-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-%e2%80%93-report-euro-news-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 02:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hope]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[watchdog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/282/banks%e2%80%99-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-%e2%80%93-report-euro-news-2</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The paper said the decision was taken after Britain’s consumer watchdog, the Office of Fair Trading, dropped its case against retail lenders over bank charges, giving new hope that an ... In November the UK Supreme Court ruled against the watchdog ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The paper said the decision was taken after Britain’s consumer watchdog, the Office of Fair Trading, dropped its case against retail lenders over bank charges, giving new hope that an &#8230; In November the UK Supreme Court ruled against the watchdog &#8230;</p>
<p>See the original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.euronews.net/newswires/108033-banks-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-times/" title="Banks’ fees victory spurs Foxtons appeal – report - Euro News">Banks’ fees victory spurs Foxtons appeal – report &#8211; Euro News</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/282/banks%e2%80%99-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-%e2%80%93-report-euro-news-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Banks&#8217; fees victory spurs Foxtons appeal &#8211; report &#8211; Reuters UK</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/278/banks-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-report-reuters-uk</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/278/banks-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-report-reuters-uk#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 01:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foxtons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[landlords]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reclaiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trading]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/278/banks-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-report-reuters-uk</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Office of Fair Trading took action against Foxtons in 2008 after it received complaints from landlords about hidden fees. The High Court ruled in July that the estate agent's terms had to be flagged prominently. In November the UK Supreme Court ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Office of Fair Trading took action against Foxtons in 2008 after it received complaints from landlords about hidden fees. The High Court ruled in July that the estate agent&#8217;s terms had to be flagged prominently. In November the UK Supreme Court &#8230;</p>
<p>See the article here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5BN06S20091224" title="Banks' fees victory spurs Foxtons appeal - report - Reuters UK">Banks&#8217; fees victory spurs Foxtons appeal &#8211; report &#8211; Reuters UK</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/278/banks-fees-victory-spurs-foxtons-appeal-report-reuters-uk/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bank charges challenge is dropped by regulator &#8211; BBC Business</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/262/bank-charges-challenge-is-dropped-by-regulator-bbc-business</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/262/bank-charges-challenge-is-dropped-by-regulator-bbc-business#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fairness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ruling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trading]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/262/bank-charges-challenge-is-dropped-by-regulator-bbc-business</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has decided to drop its investigation into the fairness of bank overdraft charges. It follows last month's Supreme Court ruling that the OFT could not use part of the unfair contract regulations to decide if bank ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has decided to drop its investigation into the fairness of bank overdraft charges. It follows last month&#8217;s Supreme Court ruling that the OFT could not use part of the unfair contract regulations to decide if bank &#8230;</p>
<p>Read more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/homepage/i/int/business/topstories/7/-/news/1/hi/business/8425766.stm" title="Bank charges challenge is dropped by regulator - BBC Business">Bank charges challenge is dropped by regulator &#8211; BBC Business</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/262/bank-charges-challenge-is-dropped-by-regulator-bbc-business/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Q&amp;A: Bank charges &#8211; The Guardian</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/251/qa-bank-charges-the-guardian</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/251/qa-bank-charges-the-guardian#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[favour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reclaiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sector]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unauthorised]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/251/qa-bank-charges-the-guardian</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The OFT today announced it was abandoning its legal fight against Britain's banking sector over unauthorised overdraft charges, after the supreme court ruled in favour of the banks last month. Millions of bank customers and consumer groups had been ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The OFT today announced it was abandoning its legal fight against Britain&#8217;s banking sector over unauthorised overdraft charges, after the supreme court ruled in favour of the banks last month. Millions of bank customers and consumer groups had been &#8230;</p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/dec/22/bank-charges-your-rights" title="Q&#038;A: Bank charges - The Guardian">Q&#038;A: Bank charges &#8211; The Guardian</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/251/qa-bank-charges-the-guardian/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OFT drops bank charges investigation &#8211; In the News</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/254/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-in-the-news</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/254/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-in-the-news#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[overdraft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reclaiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[remit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trading]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/254/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-in-the-news</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has announced it is to drop its investigation into the use of bank overdraft charges. Last month the newly-created supreme court ruled the issue did not come under the OFT's remit. The regulator said on Tuesday it ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has announced it is to drop its investigation into the use of bank overdraft charges. Last month the newly-created supreme court ruled the issue did not come under the OFT&#8217;s remit. The regulator said on Tuesday it &#8230;</p>
<p>View post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/finance/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-$1349000.htm" title="OFT drops bank charges investigation - In the News">OFT drops bank charges investigation &#8211; In the News</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/254/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-in-the-news/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OFT drops bank charges investigation &#8211; MyFinances.co.uk</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/257/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-myfinances-co-uk</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/257/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-myfinances-co-uk#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reclaiming bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trading]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/257/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-myfinances-co-uk</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has dropped its investigation into unauthorised bank charges, it has announced today. The move comes following the OFT's defeat at the Supreme Court last month. The test case ruled the organisation could not use ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has dropped its investigation into unauthorised bank charges, it has announced today. The move comes following the OFT&#8217;s defeat at the Supreme Court last month. The test case ruled the organisation could not use &#8230;</p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.myfinances.co.uk/loans-and-credit/news/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-$1348972.htm" title="OFT drops bank charges investigation - MyFinances.co.uk">OFT drops bank charges investigation &#8211; MyFinances.co.uk</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/257/oft-drops-bank-charges-investigation-myfinances-co-uk/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Q&amp;A: Bank overdraft charges &#8211; BBC Business</title>
		<link>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/274/qa-bank-overdraft-charges-bbc-business</link>
		<comments>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/274/qa-bank-overdraft-charges-bbc-business#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>UFBC</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bank Charges News Alerts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claim bank charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/274/qa-bank-overdraft-charges-bbc-business</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After nearly three years of trying to use the law to attack the scale of bank charges, the OFT has thrown in the towel. Last month, the Supreme Court told the OFT that it could not use part of the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations to ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After nearly three years of trying to use the law to attack the scale of bank charges, the OFT has thrown in the towel. Last month, the Supreme Court told the OFT that it could not use part of the 1999 Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations to &#8230;</p>
<p>Read the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8426045.stm" title="Q&#038;A: Bank overdraft charges - BBC Business">Q&#038;A: Bank overdraft charges &#8211; BBC Business</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://unfairbankcharges.org.uk/274/qa-bank-overdraft-charges-bbc-business/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
