Hi folks
I'm going to share some information I've just noticed elsewhere on the internet. It's a legal issue, rather than something I'd expect the experts to have in-depth knowledge about, but I'm sure they'll have some thoughts to share with us [:)].
As regular readers will know, some banks have refused to pay out PPI refunds to people who had been in a Trust deed, even after they had been discharged, and have set-off the refund against 'their' debt.
There was a court case last year where Alison Donnelly challenged RBS about this. She lost the original case, and appealed to the Sheriff Appeal Court. She lost again.
The Scottish Courts website has just published the judgement on a new appeal by Alison Donnelly. It looks to me (though I did get a bit bogged down!) that this time she has won the appeal.
The judgement mentions the Mond case - the one where the Court of Session basically said that when a debtor and trustee are discharged from a trust deed the debts no longer exist, so trustees can't re-open an old trust deed to get PPI refunds.
The new Donnelly appeal judgement - as I read it - says that since the debts no longer exist, the bank has no right of set-off. Donnelly will get her money.
Obviously, that's just my reading of it! Please treat it as one person's opinion until there's some way of getting confirmation.
The full judgement is on the Sheriff Court website, in the 'Sheriff Appeal Court - Civil' section, under 'Search judgements'.
This is a different issue to the one about the re-opening of trust deeds, which has caused much debate over recent months. This judgement says:
"It was also brought to our attention that leave to appeal by the defender in that case to the UK Supreme Court had been refused by the Inner House but it was also understood that an application was to be made directly to the UK Supreme Court for leave to appeal to that court."
In other words, the Appeal court doesn't know any more than this board about whether or when an appeal will go to the Supreme Court.
Hi Candlewick,
Well spotted and thank you very much for sharing this.
I'm not going to claim I've understood every word in this judgement, so best for people to read it themselves if this topic is of interest to them. I've tried to link to it but it isn't working - so follow Candlewick's guide and you'll hopefully find it quickly as I was able to.
I'm not seeing anything in this judgment that wouldn't be seen as a positive by those who contend old PPI claims should be paid to them following the completion of a trust deed.
In terms of the Mond case however, it appears likely that more patience will be required from those with an interest.
Thanks Candlewick.
As you say, as a non-lawyer it isn't easy to decipher what all of this means exactly. What I took from it is that the Appeal court seems to have agreed with Ms Donnelly that the decision in the Dooneen/Mond case undermines a particular aspect of the decision in her case against RBS. However, I would be very surprised if this were the final say on the matter, with further legal wranglings seemingly likely in both this case and the Dooneen/Mond case which could very easily change the picture again.
This sounds promising
Surely this can't go on forever Kevin. There has to be a final decision at some point .
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0218.html
Not sure how ( or if at all ) this changes things?
RBS are still sitting on my payout [:(!]
Am I right in saying that RBS should not be using set off once discharged from a PTD?
Also if Luke reads this can you advise the name of the solicitor Donnelly used and who you have been in touch with?
Hi got message . Going to be a waiting game . I don't think rbs will pay out anything until they change there policy . Which could soon .
So does this means banks won’t off set now
So does this means banks won’t off set now
Email from ppi executive team today they said in light off the mond case they are reviewing there policy in regards to ppi money due to debtors . Still a Waiting game
Their way of saying monies will be paid out is my opinion on that one luke hope I am right