A High Court test case that could shape the future of the UK retail banking industry finally got under way today when lawyers for eight of Britain's leading banks began defending allegations of charging “rip-off” fees.

Lawyers for the banks, which include Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) Barclays and HSBC, told the court that rules governing what is and is not a “fair” contract do not apply to bank charges for unauthorised overdrafts.

The fees, which can be as high as £40 each and earn UK banks around £10 million a day, are at the centre of a multibillion-pound battle between consumer watchdog the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and the banks.

One of the most eagerly awaited commercial court cases in recent years began with lawyers for one of the banks saying the OFT itself must bear part of the blame for the torrent of court claims that had already been launched by dissatisfied customers.

Laurence Rabinowitz, QC, representing RBS, told Mr Justice Andrew Smith in London that the “flood of claims currently engulfing the court system” was partly a result of “ill-judged comments” made by the OFT.

He said the OFT, following its report on credit card charges, had stated that exactly the same principles applied to current accounts.

The comment was “unfortunate” because it was made before the OFT had even begun its ongoing investigation into current account overdraft charges.

It became obvious that, “a hornets' nest having been stirred”, the matter should go to court for a decision on the issues, Mr Rabinowitz added.

Around 50,000 legal claims against the banks on the issue have been put on hold pending the outcome of today’s case.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure