Britain’s largest banks and the Office of Fair Trading remain locked in a case management hearing in court over the thorny issue of current account default charges, but the judge has already indicated that the banks will be given the green light to appeal the ruling against them. The appeal — on at least part of Mr Justice Andrew Smith’s ruling, which relates to “fairness” and the rights of customers to sue banks — is a hammer-blow to scores of consumers whose claims for compensation have been put on hold while the matter trundles through the courts.

The issue could now go to the Appeal Court and the House of Lords before the full case goes to court — and that could take two years or more. In the meantime, the Financial Services Authority has put on hold customer complaints and court cases relating to the charges, putting the brakes on any compensation payments. And, as the legal process rumbles on, the banks continue to rake in vast sums of money by hitting consumers who go over their overdraft limit or write a cheque that bounces with exorbitant charges. Analysts have estimated that that banks make up to 3.5 billion pounds in overdraft charges every year: by delaying the case, they could amass some 7 billion pounds.

Time, it seems, is money. But despite the ban on compensation payments, those who believe they have been hit with “unfair” bank charges should not delay. Customers can’t stop the banks from appealing – but they can stop the clock from counting down the time allowed to submit their claims.

Currently, bank customers can reclaim “unfair” charges plus interest from the past six years — as far back you can go in the courts. Submitting your claim as soon as possible might not mean you’ll get any subsequent rebate sooner, but it will stop the clock from ticking on how far back the claim can stretch.

“Anyone who plans to appeal should write to their bank to ask for the charges to be refunded,” advises David Kuo, head of personal finance at Fool.co.uk. “Follow up with a letter threatening court proceedings. Many courts will probably stay the majority of claims, but at least the six-year limitation on your claim will be halted too.

“Banks know that time is money, which is why they are appealing — they want to hang on to your money for as long as possible. But bank customers can get their own back. Submit your claims without delay so you can get your refund in full when banks run out of time — and options.”

Consumers might be one step closer to being able to claim back billions of pounds in bank changes following the High Court ruling this week that paved the way for the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to assess bank charges for fairness. But it’s not all rosy in the garden for bank customers.

The show is far from over, and dragging the process out is costing consumers 111 pounds per second, according to consumer group Which? Based on the OFT’s estimate that banks make up to 3.5 billion pounds per year from unauthorised overdraft charges, the amount the banks have made since the start of the test case on Jan. 14 at 10 a.m. will hit 1 billion pounds just before 5 p.m. this Sunday. That is the equivalent to 110.98 pounds per second — or 399,600 pounds per hour.

Further High Court hearings will consider a fair amount for bank charges, and the exact timetable will be decided at a hearing on May  22. In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of cases are still on hold: the Financial Services Authority gave banks a waiver from dealing with bank charge reclaiming cases until after the case — meaning they needn’t respond to complaints in the meantime. The clock is ticking: you can only attempt to claim charges over the past six years (five in Scotland), and delaying might mean you lose the ability to get old charges back.

And there could be one even more significant upshot: an end to “free” banking.

As it stands, high street banking is largely free for those who remain in credit and do not flout the rules. Contrary to popular belief — 60 percent of UK consumers believe that Britain’s banks have the highest bank charges in the world — UK bank accounts are, in fact, ranked amongst the top three countries in the world for best value, a survey from EDS shows. This is due to banks and building societies offering free overdraft facilities for student and graduate accounts, credit cards offering 0 percent finance and attractive returns on instant-access savings accounts.

However, those who slip into the red — either an authorised or unauthorised overdraft — are hit with interest or fees. A curb on fees could very well see banks impose annual or monthly banking fees for all customers. That is unlikely to please over half of the population: 51 percent of consumers polled by EDS would prefer charges to come from less transparent means, such as lower interest rates on their current and savings accounts, rather than a monthly charge (37 percent) or per transaction (12 percent). Those banks who start to impose fees first will, of course, haemorrhage customers. But, if rivals follow suit, what choice will consumers have?