Have you been underpaid for your PPI reclaim?

Former_MSE_Wendy · 1 April 2014 at 8:41PM

Hi all

We've just added a section to our PPI guide about Comparative redress - where some people have only had partial refunds, because lenders treated them as if they'd been sold the wrong type of PPI rather than completely mis-sold PPI.

Whether you received your offer in the last week or over a year ago, if you disagree you would have bought this different PPI it's NOT compulsory for you to accept your bank's decision.

Let us know below if you're affected. And if you contacted your bank about it, how did you get on.

Thanks and good luck, MSE Wendy

Stupid_Question · 1 April 2014 at 11:27PM

This is a ridiculous non story about a perfectly legitimate approach to redress.

I'd expect better from MSE, this is a story being pushed by a CMC Trade Organisation, why are you giving it publicity?

The banks offer is final, if you disagree go to FOS.

If you've already accepted it you cannot go back and 'reclaim your reclaim'

Brokerwise · 2 April 2014 at 8:24AM

MSE_Wendy wrote: »

Hi all

We've just added a section to our PPI guide about Comparative redress - where some people have only had partial refunds, because lenders treated them as if they'd been sold the wrong type of PPI rather than completely mis-sold PPI.

Whether you received your offer in the last week or over a year ago, if you disagree you would have bought this different PPI it's NOT compulsory for you to accept your bank's decision.

Let us know below if you're affected. And if you contacted your bank about it, how did you get on.

Thanks and luck, MSE Wendy

Complete and utter nonsense

Brokerwise · 2 April 2014 at 8:29AM

Stupid_Question wrote: »

This is a ridiculous non story about a perfectly legitimate approach to redress.

I'd expect better from MSE, this is a story being pushed by a CMC Trade Organisation, why are you giving it publicity?

The banks offer is final, if you disagree go to FOS.

If you've already accepted it you cannot go back and 'reclaim your reclaim'

:T CMC's trying to re flog the dying horse as they have no other business model

dunstonh · 2 April 2014 at 8:46AM

A couple of the media outlets reported something similar last week. They got it completely wrong in how they reported it. MSE seems to have fallen for it to.

The comparative redress method would not be used on upheld complaints. It is used on rejected complaints but still results in some redress due to the adjustment from single to regular. It can result in more people getting redress. Not less.

roxorx · 2 April 2014 at 1:20PM

My claim was settled last week with the Royal Bank of Scotland, they offered me an amount minus the monthly PPI cover amount they thought I would take. They accepted in writing that I had been miss-sold. After much reading up on here and on the FSA's website it appeared that this was a valid reason for them to use and they quoted the guidelines almost word for word.

I went back and argued the settlement figure as I would've had cover in other ways. They said that it was still in line with their guidelines, and I chose to accept their offer. It didn't seem worthwhile going to the Ombudsman for something that is in line with what they say.

The article that led me here got my hopes up, but reading the above comments it sounds like it was settled in a correct manner?

roxorx · 2 April 2014 at 1:26PM

dunstonh wrote: »

A couple of the media outlets reported something similar last week. They got it completely wrong in how they reported it. MSE seems to have fallen for it to.

The comparative redress method would not be used on upheld complaints. It is used on rejected complaints but still results in some redress due to the adjustment from single to regular. It can result in more people getting redress. Not less.

My bank upheld my complaint and did use comparative redress. Would this mean they have not acted correctly?

[Deleted User] · 2 April 2014 at 1:34PM

roxorx wrote: »

The article that led me here got my hopes up, but reading the above comments it sounds like it was settled in a correct manner?

You can dispute any offer of redress and refer your complaint to the Ombudsman if you remain dissatisfied. However, there is little point in doing this if the correct procedure has been followed because FOS is unlikely to change this.

roxorx wrote: »

They accepted in writing that I had been miss-sold.

Read their letter again, I doubt you'll find anything which actually states that you were mis-sold or that they accept this to be the case. They will have simply offered to redress your complaint.

roxorx wrote: »

My bank upheld my complaint and did use comparative redress. Would this mean they have not acted correctly?

No, it means they upheld your complaint insofar as they agreed that you wouldn't have taken a single premium policy which attracted extra interest.
So it's only been upheld in part.

Going to the Ombudsman will mean that you get no redress for about eighteen months, with very likely the same outcome!

dunstonh · 2 April 2014 at 1:39PM

Here is the FOS guide on the subject:

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/PPI-comparative-redress.pdf

My bank upheld my complaint and did use comparative redress. Would this mean they have not acted correctly?

.

If they uphold your complaint as mis-sold as the PPI was unsuitable or you were ineligible or similar to that then they should not use this method. If they are upholding the complaint as not being mis-sold but set up incorrectly then they should use this method.

roxorx · 2 April 2014 at 1:49PM

Thank you both, I'll go back through their 6 page letter tonight and check the exact wording. Many thanks.

EssexMark · 27 June 2014 at 5:55PM

I have to say I am quite dismayed at the negativity around this, so thought I would report back my success to you.

Way back before the banks had caved in, I wrote to Lloyds TSB with paperwork that I could find about recent loans I had had with them (I had loans with Lloyds TSB stretching back over many years - always refinancing them..). I reckoned they owed me about £4k. They wrote back and denied all responsibility, but rather bizarrely still offered me £4k anyway, which I was obviously very pleased with. This was c. 2009.

Then, last year, they wrote to me again (without prompting) about all the other loans I had had with them. I completed their questionnaire, and got back a further almost £12k. You could have knocked me down with a feather.

Anyway, I was over the moon, as you can imagine, until I read about the comparative redress argument. So I re-checked my paperwork, and, sure enough, Lloyds had used this on some, but not all, of my loans. So, despite reading the negative comments here, I wrote again. I reckoned that they owed me a further £1.8k.

This week I received a letter, and some cheques.

They have offered me a further £5,800.

So don't anyone tell me that this doesn't work, and it's not worth doing, and it's all a non-story - £5.8k says it isn't.

That's almost £22k reclaimed from Lloyds, so I'd like to offer my sincerest thanks to Martin and his team for doing such a wonderful job in bringing these dreadful bank practices to our attention and in telling us how to claim for ourselves without going through some dodgy third party who would cream off all the profits.

Have you been underpaid for your PPI reclaim?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free