Rejecting by Ombudsman Investigator - Advice please

miffythesmartbunny · 17 October 2016 at 12:29PM

Hi there,

I am complaining on behalf of my father for two loans that he took out PPI on. Sorry for the length!

When I first complained to his bank they agreed to refund the difference between his single premium policy (paid upfront and added to cost of loan) and a regular monthly premium policy which they said would have been more appropriate for him. My issue is that neither policy was right for him. He didn't need PPI and we believe it was missold for the following reasons:

- the policy was heavily impressed on him
- he’d explained that he was financially secure and wouldn’t benefit from the policy but was told it was part of the loan
- the policy wasn’t suitable for him as he had savings, life insurance and a permanent employment with sick pay
- the policy was sold as part and parcel of the agreement

However, the ombudsman upheld the bank's offer and said it was fair because the bank admitted that the cancellation terms of the policy weren’t made clear to him.

For the second loan:
The ombudsman also said that although the bank could not provide his original application form, they've sent through a sample application form and based on this she has concluded that he would’ve been required to tick for the policy and also print his name for it to be take out. So she hasn't seen enough to suggest he would’ve been told the policy was a part of the loan and that he had to have it. And there isn't enough to suggest he wasn’t given a real choice on whether or not to take out the policy.

My issue is that regardless of the documentation they've provided, the sales adviser very much forced this policy upon him. No doubt on some sort of commission for selling the policy.

The ombudsman admits that she thinks some of the information given could’ve been clearer, but regardless of whether he had been given better information about the policy, this wouldn’t have influenced his decision to take out the policy.

Any advice on how to proceed and whether it's worth asking for an ombudsman to review it?

Finally, if the ombudsman reviews it and still favours the bank, is my father still entitled to the refund/offer that the bank made?

Thank you in advance

Nasqueron · 17 October 2016 at 12:38PM

If it was the adjudicator that reviewed it you can go to the Ombudsman but they rarely overrule the adjudicators. The bank might have withdrawn the offer once the complaint was referred to the FOS or keep the first offer in place

The complaint reasons are pretty mixed

- the policy was heavily impressed on him
= hearsay

-he’d explained that he was financially secure and wouldn’t benefit from the policy but was told it was part of the loan
= hearsay and if he was eligible (such as it paying alongside any benefits) they that's not miss-sale

- the policy wasn’t suitable for him as he had savings, life insurance and a permanent employment with sick pay
= if he had savings that could pay off the loan, why borrow money in the first place and pay a huge amount of interest vs what he would get from savings?
= Life insurance is not a payment reason - if you think about it you are suggesting if he had trouble paying it off he could just die.
= Permanent job - police yes, anywhere else, no. Benefits = depends if the PPI would pay out as well

Second loan wise
Your complaint is hearsay, if he ticked the box and signed it then that is all they can judge it on. Bank staff may or may not have been on commission. Can you prove any of that happened?

All you can do is refer up and see what happens, 80-90% of the decisions will be upheld, so odds are against an overturn

dunstonh · 17 October 2016 at 12:57PM

- the policy was heavily impressed on him

Possible but this reason is weakened by the length of time it took between the sale and the complaint. People who are genuinely pressured to complain more or less immediately. Not years or decades later. It is a very difficult complaint to succeed on. Unlikely to be any evidence to back up the allegation. Hence why time taken to complaint is really the only guide.

- he’d explained that he was financially secure and wouldn’t benefit from the policy but was told it was part of the loan

If the adjudicator rejected the complaint then it means he would have benefited from the policy. i.e. he was eligible. If he was financially secure, why was he taking out a loan?

- the policy wasn’t suitable for him as he had savings, life insurance and a permanent employment with sick pay

If he had savings, why was he taking out a loan?
Life assurance doesnt overlap with PPI
Permanent employment with sick pay can be a possible reason but it really needs to be 12 months sick pay and most have nowhere near that.

- the policy was sold as part and parcel of the agreement

unprovable allegation.

My issue is that regardless of the documentation they've provided, the sales adviser very much forced this policy upon him. No doubt on some sort of commission for selling the policy.

What evidence do you have to back that allegation up?

Finally, if the ombudsman reviews it and still favours the bank, is my father still entitled to the refund/offer that the bank made?

That is up to the bank. They can withdraw goodwill offers if you choose to go to the FOS. Most likely they will pay the difference in loan one as the FOS seems happy with that solution.

Any advice on how to proceed and whether it's worth asking for an ombudsman to review it?

PPI complaint decisions are not complicated areas of financial planning. So, an adjudicator is unlikely to get it wrong. Referring it to an ombudsman is open to you but you need to have answers to the points made. You cant keep repeating the same thing and expect a change in decision. You have to counter the reasons with evidence. If no evidence exists then do remember that English law goes with the defendant (the bank in this case). The onus is on the one making the allegation.

[Deleted User] · 17 October 2016 at 12:59PM

miffythesmartbunny wrote: »

Any advice on how to proceed and whether it's worth asking for an ombudsman to review it?

It's very much your own choice.
However, your complaint reasons are weak and I can't see any compelling evidence that might sway the Ombudsman.
You may well believe the insurance was "forced" upon your father, but you have no actual evidence to back this up. In fact, when you claim that your father was financially secure it immediately beggars the question of why he allegedly allowed the bank to railroad him into taking out insurance on a loan he apparently did not need?

Unfortunately, most of your complaint looks like it was copy pasted from a template. These rarely meet with success unless the Bank finds other faults with the sale as part of their investigation.

You also pin far too much importance on the Bank's inability to produce the original application form. It's really not required unless it somehow showed that a mis-sale took place. It wouldn't have.

Personally, I would have been content with the partial success you achieved at the outset. I'm certain the Bank will still pay the difference between the regular and single premium policy..

miffythesmartbunny · 17 October 2016 at 3:32PM

Thank you for responses. I appreciate you taking the time out to respond.

Unfortunately my father is a little easily led where insurance is concerned. Despite his financial stability, he was talked into taking out these PPI policies on both loans. He applied in his local branch and for one of the loans, recalls the advisor going for the hard sell and suggesting he would have a better chance of being accepted if he took the policy out. It is so frustrating that there is no way to prove this! The time between the policy being taken out and the complaint being lodged is because at the time, he didn't see anything wrong with the adviser's actions. Now, with the publicity around PPI, it is clear that this practice is misselling.

With regards to savings, these were with the Credit Union, where he was advised not to touch his savings. Silly on his part, I know. I now take care of most of his finances!!!

Anyhow, thanks for the advice 👍🏻

dunstonh · 17 October 2016 at 3:50PM

With regards to savings, these were with the Credit Union, where he was advised not to touch his savings. Silly on his part, I know. I now take care of most of his finances!!!

Perhaps a complaint should be made to them as that is bad advice.

-taff · 17 October 2016 at 4:12PM

You should have complained using single premium as a cmplaint reason.

What you actually complained about was unprovable, as Dunston has said.

Nasqueron · 17 October 2016 at 4:45PM

-taff wrote: »

You should have complained using single premium as a cmplaint reason.

What you actually complained about was unprovable, as Dunston has said.

They did, the bank agreed and refunded the difference between that and a monthly fee

[Deleted User] · 17 October 2016 at 6:53PM

-taff wrote: »

You should have complained using single premium as a cmplaint reason.

The Bank upheld that reason regardless of whether it was actually complained about . The OP was offered the difference between single premium and monthly premium. The OP chose to reject this and refer the complaint to the ombudsman.

WatchMan · 17 October 2016 at 8:13PM

-taff wrote: »

You should have complained using single premium as a cmplaint reason.

What you actually complained about was unprovable, as Dunston has said.

Even if the OP hadn't mentioned that point, any issues relating to the policy being a single premium would've been considered by the investigator.

[Deleted User] · 17 October 2016 at 8:58PM

WatchMan wrote: »

Even if the OP hadn't mentioned that point, any issues relating to the policy being a single premium would've been considered by the investigator.

As already established above, the OP didn't complain about single premium, but the Bank still offered partial redress of a refund of the difference in cost.

Rejecting by Ombudsman Investigator - Advice please

Comments

Categories

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