Banking on British Justice

Earlier this week, I attended London’s Royal Court of Justice to hear if I had been successful in my case against Blom Bank. I had never been in a courtroom in my life before this case, and the experience was overwhelming.

 

As I surveyed the historic and storied surroundings, the irony of my situation hit home: despite being a Lebanese national making a claim against a Lebanese bank, it is most unlikely that I would have been granted this opportunity in Lebanon itself. However, as a resident of the United Kingdom, I was arguing that I could bring a case against Blom Bank in my adopted country, as an individual consumer.

 

As proceedings got underway, my overriding emotion was one of anger - anger that I had been forced to spend a considerable sum of money to get one of Lebanon’s largest banks into court, because they were refusing to allow me to access my own life savings. It was an absurd situation.

 

Upholding the rule of law is central to any democracy. Having access to justice is a basic human right. And yet, there were times during the hearing when I felt Blom Bank were just annoyed by my presence and the case I had brought. It seemed to me that their strategy from the very beginning was to ignore me and then delay.

 

My case centered around jurisdiction. Did I have the right to bring a case against a Lebanese Bank in the English courts? If I didn’t win that point, there would be no further hearings. I also asked for what is called a summary judgement – that is, that the defendant (in this case Blom Bank) had no defense with a real prospect of success.

 

Blom Bank didn’t send anybody to the ruling day. Nor indeed was anyone from the bank present throughout the two-day hearing the week before. They were, however, represented by the well-respected American law firm Dechart, who took their responsibility of upholding and defending justice seriously.

 

I was supported by a small but very able team from London law firm Rosenblatt, led by Joseph McCormick. It was they who first explained to me that consumers have rights in the UK, and argued for my entitlement to bring this case to the English courts.

 

For the many thousands of my compatriots who have looked on helplessly in recent months as the Lebanese economy collapsed and their life savings effectively evaporated, such a concept must seem far-fetched. Yet here I was, arguing that my inability to gain access to my own money in my own country was manifestly unfair.

 

Ultimately, the judge ruled in my favor for jurisdiction, and rejected my application for summary judgement. In other words, he felt that it was important for the issues that I had raised to be heard at trial, and that Blom Bank had the right to elucidate their defence in court.

 

It was a relief to hear that an independent and impartial judge had decided I had a right to bring this case, particularly because the sense I got from my dealings with Blom Bank was that I was a nuisance who was not to be taken seriously. At a minimum, they now have to take my request seriously.

 

And, while I would have preferred to have won on summary judgement as well, the principle that Blom Bank have the right to defend themselves in court should be celebrated and welcomed.

 

By the same token, a judge has ruled that there is nothing more important than the rights of the individual consumer, and this is something that all Lebanese banks should spend some time reflecting on.

 

Having said that, this is not a final ruling in the case. It is simply the first step in asserting my right as a consumer to bring a case, just as I value the right of Blom Bank to now defend themselves if they wish. I am satisfied that a judge in an English court will now consider the issues in full.

 

The ball is now in Blom Bank’s court. It is up to them to decide how they want to proceed. But while we wait for their decision, there are a number of important principles arising from this ruling.

 

First, the courts in England and Wales will consider cases that involve consumer rights if you are domiciled in those territories. This should give some hope to the many thousands of people who are in a similar situation to me.

 

Second, despite the UK having left the European Union, the transition period continues until the end of 2020. At the heart of my case was the right of consumers living in the EU, and I am delighted that my ruling can still be used in similar cases across all member states. So, if you are domiciled in France, Germany, Cyprus or anywhere else in the EU, you can use my case as a precedent.

 

Third, while Lebanese banks have been mindful of customers resident in the United States, it seems to me that they were less cognizant of the rights that consumers throughout the European Union enjoy. I suspect that many Lebanese financial institutions, and the Association of Lebanese Banks, have only just realised the potential impact on them selling and marketing their services across the EU.

 

Fourth, despite what the banks like to tell you, individual consumers do have rights, and it is important that we all assert them. It is, after all, perfectly acceptable to ask for your life savings to be returned.

 

Many banks will doubtless welcome the fact that individual cases are stuck in a legal mire, and may try to hold things up so that they are not forced to return our savings. But the court in England recognised that such delaying tactics are unfair on consumers, and instructed for the next stage of the proceedings to happen as quickly as possible.

 

Many very wealthy Lebanese expatriates have expressed their willingness to help their fellow citizens, and my case has shown a way for them to do so. Perhaps these billionaires should now fund individual consumers to take legal action in their country of domicile? This would be a tangible way for the Lebanese diaspora to demonstrate unity with those back home, whose suffering shows little sign of abating. At the same time, Lebanese banks should remember that their customers are not at fault, and it is their responsibility to give back our savings.

 

If you find yourself in a similar situation to me, my recommendation is simple: seek legal redress, and be confident in your rights as a consumer. I am mindful of how lucky I was to be able to bring this case. It wasn’t easy and it wasn’t cheap, but I am grateful that an independent court supported my right to do so.

 

Lebanese banks are not above the law. They should now do the right thing, start treating their customers as consumers with legal rights, and return our deposits. Only then can these banks rebuild the trust that they have lost.