The first day of what is expected be the final phase of a class action brought by a group of former owner managers against the Bank of Queensland saw both sides reiterate their main arguments and try to pick apart inconsistencies in the other sides' evidence.The action had its genesis back in 2004, when BOQ entered the New South Wales market using a branch franchising business model. The former owner-managers of bank branches (OMBs) have brought their claim against BOQ on the grounds that they were misled by senior bank executives who implemented an expansion plan that was based on superficial business analysis, overly optimistic projections that were never properly tested and a failure to acknowledge the bank's competitive disadvantages.The main points of contention yesterday centred around how much importance should be attached to the bank's estimates that owner-managers of franchises would need to sell A$4 million in loans to break even and how long they should take to break even and then to become "cash positive".  The bank has long asserted that its estimates, outlined to prospective branch owners by Garry Allsopp, BOQ's regional manager for NSW when the bank moved into the state, were merely indicative figures. These should have been trumped by OMBs' own business plans, according to the bank."There is a difference between looking at raw figures and coming to a conclusion on the competitiveness of the bank's products as there is no easy way to assess the performance of individual owner managers," said Simon Couper, representing the bank.He asserted that the behaviour of the owner managers in the period before action was launched was not consistent with being misled. Couper said a rational business person would be more interested in how much profit would be made, especially when hundreds of thousands of dollars were at stake, yet all the managers seemed to be asking about was when their operations would become "commercially viable".Couper also addressed an earlier argument by the OMBs that the bank was to review their business plans for viability prior to approving loans to them to purchase their franchises."It is a step too far to extend the fact that the bank is advertising for business [owners] to then imply that the bank was saying the businesses will be viable."He said that all the owner-managers who were part of this action against BOQ seemed to have made the same mistake in perception.Couper built on this theme, with a further assertion that there was an attempt, some time prior to the action being started by some OMBs against the bank, to collect "what could be called collusive statements" about being misled by Allsopp.Responding to these assertions, Nigel Cotman, representing the owners, questioned how the bank had concluded that writing $4 million in loans per month was the break-even point for a successful banking franchise in NSW. Earlier hearings - in February - had established that the figures had, in part, come from some of Westpac's branches in Queensland.Cotman observed that while Westpac was well-known