Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Richba
    • By Richba 3rd Mar 17, 11:59 AM
    • 1Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Richba
    Plevin & PPI
    • #1
    • 3rd Mar 17, 11:59 AM
    Plevin & PPI 3rd Mar 17 at 11:59 AM
    Does anyone know if you have already been awarded a PPI claim, can you claim again under Plevin, after yesterdays decision?
Page 1
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 3rd Mar 17, 12:02 PM
    • 4,179 Posts
    • 2,330 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #2
    • 3rd Mar 17, 12:02 PM
    • #2
    • 3rd Mar 17, 12:02 PM
    Does anyone know if you have already been awarded a PPI claim, can you claim again under Plevin, after yesterdays decision?
    Originally posted by Richba
    No

    Plevin is only an issue if you were rejected, if you won your case you have already had all your money back so the commission is irrelevant
    • sun73
    • By sun73 3rd Mar 17, 9:59 PM
    • 332 Posts
    • 107 Thanks
    sun73
    • #3
    • 3rd Mar 17, 9:59 PM
    • #3
    • 3rd Mar 17, 9:59 PM
    What about complaints that were initially rejected then upheld in late 2015?
    Can someone explain what the FCA statement meant by that? Is there a different rule, or a specific date in 2015 for cases that were only upheld after it?
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 3rd Mar 17, 10:45 PM
    • 4,179 Posts
    • 2,330 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #4
    • 3rd Mar 17, 10:45 PM
    • #4
    • 3rd Mar 17, 10:45 PM
    What about complaints that were initially rejected then upheld in late 2015?
    Can someone explain what the FCA statement meant by that? Is there a different rule, or a specific date in 2015 for cases that were only upheld after it?
    Originally posted by sun73
    As per previous statement, if you get a refund of your PPI there is nothing to come from Plevin, Plevin is only an issue if you were rejected AND there was commission as part of the PPI over 50% - you would not get any more money
    • puglover
    • By puglover 7th Mar 17, 5:54 PM
    • 43 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    puglover
    • #5
    • 7th Mar 17, 5:54 PM
    • #5
    • 7th Mar 17, 5:54 PM
    Hi all. I had a MPPI claim against Nationwide which was not upheld (which I still don't agree with!!) back in 2013. Can anyone advise of how I would go about making a new complaint based on the Plevin rule please.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 7th Mar 17, 6:34 PM
    • 89,530 Posts
    • 54,981 Thanks
    dunstonh
    • #6
    • 7th Mar 17, 6:34 PM
    • #6
    • 7th Mar 17, 6:34 PM
    Hi all. I had a MPPI claim against Nationwide which was not upheld (which I still don't agree with!!) back in 2013. Can anyone advise of how I would go about making a new complaint based on the Plevin rule please.
    Originally posted by puglover
    You dont make a new complaint. You contact them stating that they rejected your complaint in 2013 and that you have become aware of the FCA ruling regarding Plevin and would like them to review your case to see if a part refund applies.

    I wouldnt hold your breathe though. Most MPPI was less than 50% (typically between 17.5% and 37.5%). Single premium MPPI could be higher (above the 50% level) but Nationwide never retailed single premium MPPI. So, unless they were taking well above the norm when it comes to regular contribution MPPI, you would not expect a partial refund. By all means give it a try. So far, we have only had one post from someone with a case looked at with Plevin and that was card card PPI and we in the 30% range. So, no part refund made.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Agricolae
    • By Agricolae 7th Mar 17, 8:31 PM
    • 364 Posts
    • 189 Thanks
    Agricolae
    • #7
    • 7th Mar 17, 8:31 PM
    • #7
    • 7th Mar 17, 8:31 PM
    I would just add here that the FCA is including profit share as well as commission in "Plevin" complaints.

    My reading of the rather lengthy and dry FCA policy statement is that MPPI policies tended to be low commission/high profit share, so this may change the landscape somewhat.
    • puglover
    • By puglover 9th Mar 17, 10:32 AM
    • 43 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    puglover
    • #8
    • 9th Mar 17, 10:32 AM
    • #8
    • 9th Mar 17, 10:32 AM
    Thank you for your help and and advice. I am a little nervous of how to approach this with Nationwide and what to say. Should I ask them to review the original case based on the Plevin ruling and for them investigate the commission and profit share element on this MPPI?
    OR
    Should I wait until more information has been released from the FCA?

    Many thanks
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 9th Mar 17, 10:46 AM
    • 89,530 Posts
    • 54,981 Thanks
    dunstonh
    • #9
    • 9th Mar 17, 10:46 AM
    • #9
    • 9th Mar 17, 10:46 AM
    Should I wait until more information has been released from the FCA?
    The FCA issued its consultation nearly a year ago and its final ruling more recently was virtually unchanged from the initial proposals. So, information is not an issue.

    Just ask them to look at your case under the recent Plevin ruling from the FCA. A simple single sentence. Dont mention profit share as that is not something that applies here and not something you need to worry about.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Broke1967
    • By Broke1967 10th Mar 17, 12:30 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Broke1967
    Plevin and PPI
    Does anyone know if I can start a fresh mis-selling claim based on the Plevin case?
    My claim was rejected due to time barring by Santander, however, they are still looking into it on the basis of Plevin.
    My understanding is that you only get one refund. The recent post on MSE states (On a £10,000 loan over five years, your 'Plevin' compensation would typically be £500 (if you're due all the PPI back for other mis-selling, you don't get both). that you only get one, but, this would appear to be unfair if you are rejected for getting PPI refund of thousands, and can only claim hundreds based on the Plevin based refunds. Surely mis-selling is mis-selling which ever form it takes, why should one refund path lead to thousands, and, another path lead to hundreds?
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 10th Mar 17, 2:14 PM
    • 89,530 Posts
    • 54,981 Thanks
    dunstonh
    Does anyone know if I can start a fresh mis-selling claim based on the Plevin case?
    No you can't. That is not what it is about.

    My claim was rejected due to time barring by Santander, however, they are still looking into it on the basis of Plevin.
    The timebar still stands. Plevin is a secondary consideration.

    My understanding is that you only get one refund.
    Or nothing. Plevin is not about refunding the premium. It only applies to rejected complaints (not those upheld) and only if the commission on the policy exceeded 50%. If it did, then the execess above the 50% is refunded. i.e. if the commission was 55% then you would get a 5% refund. If the commission was 23% then there would be no refund.

    Surely mis-selling is mis-selling which ever form it takes, why should one refund path lead to thousands, and, another path lead to hundreds?
    Plevin is not about mis-selling. It is about a recent court case and has a specific outcome.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Agricolae
    • By Agricolae 11th Mar 17, 3:35 AM
    • 364 Posts
    • 189 Thanks
    Agricolae
    The FCA issued its consultation nearly a year ago and its final ruling more recently was virtually unchanged from the initial proposals. So, information is not an issue.

    Just ask them to look at your case under the recent Plevin ruling from the FCA. A simple single sentence. Dont mention profit share as that is not something that applies here and not something you need to worry about.
    Originally posted by dunstonh
    According to the FCA paper profit share on MPPI almost certainly will matter due to its low commission and high profit share nature. They don't need to mention it as hopefully the bank will consider it together with a commission complaint, but I don't think we can say it's irrelevant.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 11th Mar 17, 1:58 PM
    • 89,530 Posts
    • 54,981 Thanks
    dunstonh
    According to the FCA paper profit share on MPPI almost certainly will matter due to its low commission and high profit share nature. They don't need to mention it as hopefully the bank will consider it together with a commission complaint, but I don't think we can say it's irrelevant.
    Originally posted by Agricolae
    It doesnt matter to the person making the complaint. It isnt something they need to raise. They just need to ask for it to be looked at under the Plevin ruling.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • puglover
    • By puglover 15th Mar 17, 10:20 AM
    • 43 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    puglover
    Morning - An update for you. I contacted Nationwide and they have said that they will not investigate any Plevin ruling issue until August 2017. I then spoke to FOS who have said that as my MPPI only ran up to 2005 that Plevin would not be considered on this claim. They have said that they will only look at any MPPI Plevin issue if the MPPI ran past 2008.

    Thought this may be of interest to you, any comments appreciated
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 15th Mar 17, 10:36 AM
    • 89,530 Posts
    • 54,981 Thanks
    dunstonh
    The 2008 part of the ruling is going to significantly reduce the volume of payouts on this.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 15th Mar 17, 10:44 AM
    • 4,179 Posts
    • 2,330 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    Does anyone know if I can start a fresh mis-selling claim based on the Plevin case?
    My claim was rejected due to time barring by Santander, however, they are still looking into it on the basis of Plevin.
    My understanding is that you only get one refund. The recent post on MSE states (On a £10,000 loan over five years, your 'Plevin' compensation would typically be £500 (if you're due all the PPI back for other mis-selling, you don't get both). that you only get one, but, this would appear to be unfair if you are rejected for getting PPI refund of thousands, and can only claim hundreds based on the Plevin based refunds. Surely mis-selling is mis-selling which ever form it takes, why should one refund path lead to thousands, and, another path lead to hundreds?
    Originally posted by Broke1967
    This is a misunderstanding of how things work.

    PPI miss-selling means you should get a refund of anything you paid as part of that PPI (plus any interest that is applicable)

    The Plevin ruling is NOT miss-selling, it's an undeclared commission. Indeed, the whole point is that people affected were NOT miss-sold i.e. PPI was sold correctly, they were just poorly treated by the advisor. The issue with Plevin is not even about commission - it's about EXCESSIVE commission - any commission under 50% was perfectly fine and there is no issue with it at all. Plevin only applies in cases where there was more than 50% and so you get back the amount over 50%
    • Gig1968
    • By Gig1968 30th Aug 17, 5:28 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Gig1968
    Hi guys
    Haven't been on for a while . I've been looking all around for answers to a frustrating question I have.
    I made a ppl claim against MBNA that was timebarred as it relates to 2010. I understand thats true and that's my fault.

    I have read many articles in the newspapers but it fails to say how far back that Plevin applies too.

    I just accessed MBNA site where it talks about Plevin.

    Does anyone know what date Plevin is backdated too
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 30th Aug 17, 5:54 PM
    • 89,530 Posts
    • 54,981 Thanks
    dunstonh
    Haven't been on for a while . I've been looking all around for answers to a frustrating question I have.
    I made a ppl claim against MBNA that was timebarred as it relates to 2010. I understand thats true and that's my fault.

    I have read many articles in the newspapers but it fails to say how far back that Plevin applies too.

    I just accessed MBNA site where it talks about Plevin.

    Does anyone know what date Plevin is backdated too
    Originally posted by Gig1968

    As the MBNA site says, they will be automatically going back to people with rejected complaints to see if Plevin applies. You do not need to do anything.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Gig1968
    • By Gig1968 30th Aug 17, 6:07 PM
    • 10 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Gig1968
    Thanks for the reply. I contacted MBNA and their reaction was that any complaint I made would be timebarred
    • Natsu
    • By Natsu 1st Sep 17, 9:35 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Natsu
    Sorry but could someone please clarify whether we have legitimat course of action to take in our situation. My partner was told by RBS in 1999 that the only way he could get a loan was if he took out some sort of specialised insurance (but he didn't understand what it was just knew that he could not get the loan without it). He didn't have any paperwork and fought the coldcalls for years. In late 2011 to early 2012, somone convinced him to put in a claim. RBS denied they had any information that he had PPI through them. He was adamant that he did have it, and we found out that he did have PPI but it was with a Broker (whose name we can not find at the moment. I think maybe the Mortgage Company). In the end he was denied and was told that because the Brokers were not regulated at that time, he would likely be unsuccessful but they wanted him to complain to the Ombudsman anyway. He was going to but as this situation occurred, myself and the children became very ill for 4 months. He then developed Pneumonia and was still recovering almost 6 months later. He missed the deadline to complain and was a bit disappointed but thought, he wasn't going to get anything anyway.

    My questions are: 1. He was still mis-sold it, RBS told him he must have it. It was the only way he could get the mortgage. If not directly through them then through somone they approved of. RBS gave him info on the Broker company and Broker did not tell him anything about the PPI. It was very much, the hoops you must go through to get the mortgage otherwise you will not get it. But because the broker's were unregulated this was all legitimate so can not constitute 'miss-selling' because he didn't video record the RBS or Broker guy? Becuase that is what it comes down to is a he/she said scenario.

    2. Would he have a claim through Plevin (eventhough Plevin is not an 'mis-selling' issue)?

    3. Does he need to contact the Ombudsman first to determine whether he can restart a claim for Plevin? (If he is eligible to go that route).

    4. We have recently moved and because we purged our old stuff and some paperwork, we no longer have the letter indicating that he had some payment protection plan through the Broker. I discovered another piece of paper that points to his association with The Mortgage Company but its not the original letter we used to prove to RBS that PPI was taken out. Is that going to be a problem if we can claim through Plevin? He does have information regarding Payment Protection Pamphlet from PaymentProtect. But its just a pamphlet, although he wouldn't have kept it if it wasn't significant.

    Sorry for the long windedness but I've read so much that I've gotten lost and want to make sure that I have understood what I have read.
    Thank you
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

113Posts Today

2,161Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @iiSteveJonesii: @MartinSLewis After watching you talk this morning about me burning £300 I got on a comparison site tonight & sure enou?

  • In or near York? This Wed the @itvmlshow Roadshow" will be at the York Food & Drink Festival - do come and say hi; St Sampsons Square 11-4.

  • It's the subtle poetry and lyricism of tweets like this that I find so endearing https://t.co/XhSKBCGyXe

  • Follow Martin