What the court's ruling means for other claimants

Yesterday's ruling does not mean that if you are claiming back your bank charges, you should abandon your case.

All the campaigners say that you should continue and that you still have a very high chance of winning. But not perhaps the certainty that was previously thought.

Related articles

• Lloyds wins legal victory against customer seeking charges refund
• Search the news archive for more stories

After all, the Lloyds TSB case was the first time that the legality of unauthorised borrowing charges had been tested in court. And the bank won.

In every other known case until now, the banks have settled cases before court, sometimes on the day of the case.

It may be that Lloyds TSB carefully selected Kevin Berwick's case to make a stand, and that his case is not typical. It must be noted that the bank had already offered a settlement to Mr Berwick, indicating it was not determined to enter the courtroom. It may also be that other judges, perhaps more senior judges, would not agree with District Judge Cook's ruling.

A test case involving a barrister, Tom Brennan, should shed further light on cases later this year.

In the meantime, anyone who has been charged penalty fees in the past six years should certainly consider a claim. Perhaps, though, until the legal situation is clearer, claimants should accept a reasonable offer of settlement - say three quarters of the amount claimed.