Banking insurance & finance
Hatzlacha - The Movement for the Promotion of a Fair Society v. Bank Hapoalim
failure to report abandoned assets
Application to certify a class action, filed in May 2020 against Bank Hapoalim and Bank Mizrachi Tefahot, on behalf of owners of abandoned accounts. According to the law, banks are obliged to report the administrator general of abandoned assets. The applicant claims that the banks report abandoned accounts only if the sum in the account accede a certain level, set by each bank at its own discretion. Other abandoned accounts are not reported, and hence their existence is not brought to their owners` attention. The applicant demands that the bank operate in accordance with the law, and compensate the owners of the abandoned accounts.
We represent the applicant together Ofer Levi, advocate.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Levi v. HaPhoenix
breach of contractual obligation to provide free coverage
Application to certify a class action against HaPhoenix, an insurance company, filed in February 2020. According to the application, the company marketed a health insurance policy, which included free coverage from the fourth child and on. With respect to children born in 2016 or later, the company no longer follows its contractual obligation.
Our office represents the applicant, together with Roni Avissar-Sade.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Stolarski v. S. Shlomo Vehicle
breach of car rental company`s obligation to fulfill its duties as an insurer
Application to certify a class action, against Shlomo SIXT, a car rental company, filed on behalf of car owners who suffered damage in car accidents, caused by vehicles owned by the company. The application was filed in November 2018. Shlomo SIXT provides its clients car rental services, which include an undertaking to compensate for any damage caused by the company`s vehicles to third party vehicles. Therefore, the company is obligated to act as an insurer and to carry out any duty which follows. The company renounces these duties. The applicant demands that the company fulfill its duties.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Hatzlacha the Consumers' Movement for the Promotion of a Fair Society and Economy v. Bank Hapoalim
early repayment charges
Application to certify a class action, filed in August 2019 against Bank Hapoalim, on behalf of clients who paid early repayment charges. According to the application, the bank unlawfully demands its clients to pay early repayment charges, in cases the bank initiates the early repayment of loans. The Bank is demanded to cease these charges and to return the amounts unlawfully charged.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
B. H. Nur v. Clal Insurance Company
excessive premiums for construction equipment
Application to certify a class action against three major insurance companies, which was filed in August 2019, on behalf of purchasers of construction equipment policies. The application is based on an order issued by the Insurance Authority, according to which in setting the premium, insurance companies must take into account the equipment`s age. The companies are demanded to repay the premiums unlawfully charged, and to take into account the equipment`s age in setting the premium.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
The Israeli Consumer Council v. Menora Insurance Company
supplemental services premiums
Application to certify a class action against five major insurance companies, which was filed in August 2019. According to the application, in the case of a car theft or a total loss, the insurance companies must repay the premium which was paid for supplemental services.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Aviv v. Bank Mizrachi Tefahot
unlawful charge regarding notice of overdue payments
Application to certify a class action, filed in January 2019. According to the application, the Bank`s tariff states that a fee for sending a notice of overdue payments or overdraft, will be charged after the second notice had been sent. In practice, the Bank is charging the fee starting the first notice. The applicant request repayment of the unlawful charge.
In November 2019 the court certified the class action.
Status: Class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action, Decision Certifying the Class Action.
Lapiner v. Bank Hapoalim
currency transfer and redemption of securities in a direct channel
Application to certify a class action, filed in September 2018 against Bank Hapoalim. The Bank set on its fee list discounted fees for performing direct channel actions (i.e. actions which are not performed by a bank clerk). According to the application, for currency transfer and redemption of securities services in a direct channel, the Bank charges a non-discounted fee. The Bank is demanded to cease the excessive charge and to return the amounts unlawfully charged.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Lapiner v. Bank Hapoalim
direct channel fee for immediate charge of payment cards
Application to certify a class action, filed in August 2018 against Bank Hapoalim, Bank Leumi, Discount Bank and Bank Mizrachi Tefahot. According to the application, when a client makes a purchase using a payment card, and his account is charged immediately (and not in a postponed date, as in credit cards), the banks unlawfully charge a direct channel fee (i.e. a fee which is paid for actions which are not performed by a bank clerk). The applicants request repayment of the unlawful charge.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Tamar v. Bank Leumi
unlawful charges for depositing a post-dated check
Application to certify a class action, filed in August 2018 against Bank Leumi. According to the application, the bank charges clients excessive fees for depositing a post-dated check. The claimant contends this surcharge is unlawful and demands that the bank return the fees that were charged in excess.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Azoulay v. PayPal
overcharge in transactions in NIS
Application to certify a class action against PayPal, filed in May 2018. According to the application, when a client carries out a transaction in NIS, using PayPal`s payment services, PayPal is obliged to transmit the transaction to the credit card company, in NIS. In this way, the client will be charged with the exact transaction sum. The claimants contend that PayPal transmits the transaction in USD. As a result, the credit card company purchases USD, and the client is charged with a higher sum for the transaction, and in addition, he is illegally charged with a conversion fee.
In March 2020 the court approved a settlement. According to the settlement, PayPal will compensate its clients with 5% of the transactions` amounts, in NIS.
Status: The settlement is under execution.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action, Motion to Approve a Settlement, Decision Approving the Settlement.
Lapiner v. Bank Hapoalim
unlawful charges for depositing a post-dated check
Application to certify a class action, filed in May 2018 against Bank Hapoalim and Bank Leumi. According to the application, the banks charge clients excessive fees for depositing a post-dated check using an automatic machine. The claimants contend this surcharge is unlawful and demand that the banks return the fees that were charged in excess.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Shabi v. Discount Bank
breach of the Guarantee Law
Application to certify a class action, filed in December 2017 against Discount Bank and the First International Bank of Israel. The Guarantee Law sets various restrictions regarding the collection of a debt from a guarantor. According to the application, the banks breach those restrictions.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action.
Lapiner v. Bank Leumi
charging fees for forced currency conversions
Application to certify a class action, filed in January 2017 against Bank Leumi. According to the application, when a foreign currency is deposited in an Israeli currency account, the bank converts the foreign currency to NIS, even when the client did not request the conversion. The claimant demands that the bank returns the conversion fees that were charged.
In August 2020 a settlement was approved. According to the settlement, the class members will be repaid 10%-30% of the conversion fees and exchange rate differences, depending on the amount converted.
Status: The settlement is under execution.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action, Motion to Approve a Settlement, Decision Approving the Settlement.
Mor v. IDI Insurance Company
breach of vehicle insurance policies
Application to certify a class action, filed in January 2017 against IDI Insurance Company. The company sold vehicle insurance policies that included, in the case of a total loss, the right to receive payment equaling the value of a new vehicle. As the end of the insurance period approached, the company sent insured persons an e-mail, offering to renew their policies under the same terms. The company violated its obligation, as the new policies included different terms, to the detriment of the insured persons. The claimant demands that the company pays the insured persons according to the terms of the old policies.
Status: Application to certify the class action is pending.
In August 2020, the parties reached a settlement. According to the settlement, class members will receive 50% of the difference between the payment they had received due to the total loss, and the sum which they would have gotten according to the terms of the old policies.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action, Motion to Approve a Settlement.
Lapiner v. Bank Hapoalim, Tamar v. Bank Yahav
discriminating individuals and small businesses
Applications to certify a class action against Bank Hapoalim, the First International Bank of Israel and Bank Yahav, filed in February and December 2015. Banking regulations forbid banks from charging individuals and small businesses fees exceeding the amount charged for medium and large corporations for the same services. The claimants contend that the banks violate these regulations, and seek reimbursement of the over-charges and an order enforcing the banks to comply with the regulations.
In June 2017 a settlement with Bank Hapoalim was approved. According to the settlement, the Bank will compensate its clients. In February and March 2018 similar settlements with the First International Bank and Bank Yahav were approved.
Status: The settlements are being executed.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action against Bank Hapoaim and the First International Bank of Israel, Application to Certify the Class Action against Bank Yahav, Motion to Approve a Settlement with Bank Hapoalim, Decision Approving the Settlement with Bank Hapoalim, Motion to Approve a Settlement with the First International Bank of Israel, Decision Approving the Settlement with the First International Bank of Israel, Motion to Approve a Settlement with Bank Hapoalim, Decision Approving the Settlement with Bank Yahav.
Lapiner v. Discount Bank
charging student accounts with excessive fees
Application to certify a class action against Discount Bank, on behalf of holders of student accounts, filed in July 2014. The applicants claim that when the bank offers improved terms to students, and updates its tariff accordingly, it does not apply the new terms to existing student accounts, but only to new ones. Such distinction has no basis in the bank's tariff, and the bank's publications do not support it either. Therefore, charging existing student accounts excessive fees is unlawful. In November 2016 the class action was certified, with respect to student accounts from the years 2008-2012. Both parties appealed to the Supreme Court. In October 2018 the Supreme Court upheld the Plaintiffs` appeal, dismissed the Bank`s appeal, and ruled that the class will include student account holders from the years 2008-2014.
In September 2020 a settlement was approved. According to the settlement, the bank`s clients will be repaid 95% of the excessive fees. The settlement will apply on account holders from the years 2008-2016.
Status: Settlement is being executed.
Documents: Application to Certify the Class Action, Decision Certifying the Class Action, Supreme Court`s Judgement in the Appeal on the Certification Decision, Decision Approving the Settlement.
Hagma v. Bank Mizrachi Tefahot, Hagigi v. Bank HaPoalim
unlawful charge of legal expenses
Applications to certify class actions against two major banks, on behalf of debtors against whom the banks initiated legal proceedings. The applications were filed in 2011-2012. The applicants claim that the banks recorded their legal expenses and increased the debt accordingly, without approval of the court. The applicants further claim that expenses which were recorded at the court's approval, bore a higher interest rate than that ruled by the court.
In September 2018 the court approved settlements, according to which class members will receive compensation. The compensation sum will be determined according to a sample that will be taken from the class members` accounts by a court appointed expert.
Status: The settlements are under execution.
Documents: Hagma Application, Hagigi Application, Application to Approve the Settlement with Bank Mizrachi Tefahot, Application to Approve the Settlement with Bank HaPoalim, Decision Approving the Settlement.
Dimri v. Bank Mizrachi Tefahot, Hagigi v. Bank HaPoalim, Silvera v. Bank Leumi
causing clients` debts, as recorded in the Execution Office files, to incur excessive interest
Applications to certify class actions against three major banks, on behalf of clients against whom the banks have initiated execution and collection proceedings. Dimri and Hagigi`s applications were filed in 2011, and Silvera`s application was filed in July 2015. The applicants claim that in the past, when debtors repaid a portion of the debt directly to the bank or to the lawyer representing it, the bank was late in reporting the payment to the Execution Office. During the delay period, the balance of the debt, as recorded in the Execution Office files, incurred interest at a high rate (known as "bank interest"). After the payment had been lately reported, the debtor was credited for the delay period. However, the credit was based on a lower interest rate then the one actually recorded, leaving the client damaged as a result of the late report. Following the filing of Dimri and Hagigi`s applications, the Execution and Collection Authority announced that it had fixed its systems, but the clients were not compensated. The compensation is sought in the three applications.
In September 2018 the court approved settlements in the cases against Bank HaPoalim and Bank Mizrachi Tefahot. According to the settlements, a court appointed expert will determine the compensation sum for the class members. In addition, the banks have agreed to change their conduct.
In September 2018 the District Court partially dismissed the application to certify the class action against Bank Leumi. The applicant appealed the decision.
Status: Applications to approve settlements with Bank HaPoalim and Bank Mizrachi Tefahot are pending; Appeal on the decision to partially dismiss the class action against Bank Leumi is pending.
Documents: Dimri Application, Hagigi Application, Silvera Application, Application to Approve the Settlement with Bank HaPoalim, Application to Approve the Settlement with Bank Mizrachi Tefahot, Decision Partially Dismissing the Class Action Against Bank Leumi, Appeal on the Dismissal Decision in the Bank Leumi Case, Decision Approving the Settlements.
Loading cases....
Loading...
----
(closed)
Introduce your team! Click here to add images, text and links, or connect data from your collection.