If Mis-sold PPI on loan, could that be grounds for a bank charges refund?

Hey there

I've submitted a claim for mis-sold PPI from HSBC from a long time ago at the end of the 1990s. This is speculative, I don't know if I'm going to get anything back or not but I was definitely mis-sold at the time. My account with HSBC is still open and there are reports that HSBC can go back quite a long time into customer account information. If so, great for me. If not, no harm done.

I was useless with money in my younger days and for being no more than a few hundred quid over my overdraft limits, HSBC used to charge me £75-100 a month, month in month out. In total, I paid three or four grand of charges over the first half of the 2000's. My overdraft limit was never more than a grand or so, and by the end of that time, everything I owed them on my overdraft could easily have been argued to have just been snowballed charges dating back to when they first started charging me. I added up all my bank charges back in about 2008 and I am pretty sure I have the records from my computer back then.

I was going to claim back, but didn't do it in time. The supreme court ruled that bank charges weren't unfair in and of themselves, and so couldn't be reclaimed as a matter of course. I dropped the matter.

BUT now assuming that

a) HSBC locate my PPI and are prepared to pay it out

b) I locate my old file of bank charges information and can produce it to them once they've agreed the PPI claim

c) HSBC's refund is a few hundred pounds of refunds for loan PPI paid when I didn't need to

I would argue that if HSBC had not charged me for that PPI, the extra few hundred quid that I would have had would have prevented me from my first few bank charges, which would have stopped me ever getting snowballed into "charges just making more charges"

With any likelihood of success, does this argument hold any merit?

Has anyone had any similar successes?

All of this is quite speculative, but they've made plenty of money out of me over the years for my transgressions, so I'm not going to feel bad if some of it comes back to me for theirs.

Any thoughts?

Rich

Comments

  • -taff
    -taff Posts: 14,492 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    edited 7 December 2017 at 4:55PM
    With any likelihood of success, does this argument hold any merit?

    No and no.
    No one held a gun to your head to spend money you didn't have. You could have not gone into your overdraft and they would certainly informed you of any charges associated with it .
    Shampoo? No thanks, I'll have real poo...
  • That's nearly as harsh as "if they'd given you an extra few hundred quid, you'd have spent that on sweets and nintendo as well as the rest of it."

    But equally fair I guess.
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 26,612 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Historical bank charges are never refunded I'm afraid.

    Since the Banks won their court case about charges in 2009, whatever you "argue" won't wash and you won't get a refund of them.

    You may have more luck with any PPI you may have had, particularly because you are still a customer of HSBC and so records are likely to be obtainable.
  • -taff
    -taff Posts: 14,492 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    That's nearly as harsh as "if they'd given you an extra few hundred quid, you'd have spent that on sweets and nintendo as well as the rest of it."

    But equally fair I guess.

    You;re right, probably slightly harsh at the end...I think I've just heard 'I was young and naive and the evil banks took me for a ride and made me spend money and it's not my fault etc etc' far too many times in the last few weeks.
    We were all young and stupid with money at some point, but it's lessons learned from that that determine whether or not people decide to take responsibility for themselves to sort it out or continue to play the victim....

    That above was not aimed at you by the way it was a small rant-ette....
    Shampoo? No thanks, I'll have real poo...
  • Haha @-taff
    Understood!
    I *definitely* would have spent it on sweets and nintendo. And the banks *definitely* didn't make me do it.
  • rq9292
    rq9292 Posts: 46 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    The term you are looking for is consequential loss. Some banks will look into but I think it will be almost impossible to prove that PPI was the reason you were over your limit.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards