Help needed with Lloyds PPI and FOS please

lg74

I wondered if someone can give me some advise please?

I submitted a claim to Lloyds for credit card PPI for the past 6 years or so. I wrote to them asking for details of all the cards I have ever had and based my claim on that from 2001 onwards.
Lloyds declined my claim so i sent it to the FOS, I have received a letter back today.

The letter says that in my FOS form I said the PPI was for the last 5 or 6 years, but the cover was originally taken in 1995. I based the last 6 years on the info from Lloyds and that also I didnt think I could claim over 6 years old.

I also mentioned that the sales adviser had been pushy etc, and Lloyds have come back with ' as you cant remember the date you took the claim out in, how can you remember what the salesman was like'

The FOS say i need to show the business (ie Lloyds) made an error or omission and as yet they havent seen anything to support this. They have also included a copy of the original paperwork from 1995 which Lloyds say I ticked for PPI and then signed. On looking at this, I wrote a 'N' next to PPI, but it has been ticked, and the tick is completely different to how I do them - ie looks like it was completed by someone else but how do I prove this?

I know full well that Lloyds mis-sold me the PPI, and the salesman was pushy, and that I didnt tick where they say I did - any ideas on how I go about proving them wrong to get my money back??

Would be grateful for any help on this.

catmiaow

I would get them to look over this again, i am at the same level with nationwide for PPI, its hard to prove but keep on at them!

dunstonh

I also mentioned that the sales adviser had been pushy etc, and Lloyds have come back with ' as you cant remember the date you took the claim out in, how can you remember what the salesman was like'

Which is fair enough. Remember that you are making an accusation against an individual that could cost them their job potentially or even career if they are FSA authorised.

It is important that when you make a complaint that you do not make things up, even if a template letter suggests it, because those things can work against you if the other side have evidence or information to the contrary. With grey areas where a balance of probabilities decision needs to be taken, the FOS will consider what you have said and what they have said and see which is most likely. If you have been shown to lie then it is likely to go against you.

I know full well that Lloyds mis-sold me the PPI, and the salesman was pushy

In 1995, there was no salesman for loan insurance. The clerical staff handled the applications. The staff member could have been pushy of course but the branch sales reps never got involved with the general insurance and payment protection insurance at that time. Also, the tick in the box doesnt have to be yours. You may have left it blank, then been told the benefits of the payment protection and then agreed to have it with the staff member then ticking the box.

The FOS is aware that many people are trying it on due to websites like this. It has come out in recent times and admitted that they do get many fraudulent claims. In cases like this where fraudulent claims are frequent, they do tend to expect you to proof a little more than perhaps would be the case in other business areas. Unfortunatly, the try-it-on-as-you-have-nothing-to-lose brigade spoil it for the genuine people with genuine complaints.

I'm not making any judgement on your case as I dont know the information. Just remarking on how you probably made it harder for yourself in what you have said and why the FOS have responded as such.

lg74

dunstonh wrote: »

Which is fair enough. Remember that you are making an accusation against an individual that could cost them their job potentially or even career if they are FSA authorised.

It is important that when you make a complaint that you do not make things up, even if a template letter suggests it, because those things can work against you if the other side have evidence or information to the contrary. With grey areas where a balance of probabilities decision needs to be taken, the FOS will consider what you have said and what they have said and see which is most likely. If you have been shown to lie then it is likely to go against you.
In 1995, there was no salesman for loan insurance. The clerical staff handled the applications. The staff member could have been pushy of course but the branch sales reps never got involved with the general insurance and payment protection insurance at that time. Also, the tick in the box doesnt have to be yours. You may have left it blank, then been told the benefits of the payment protection and then agreed to have it with the staff member then ticking the box.

The FOS is aware that many people are trying it on due to websites like this. It has come out in recent times and admitted that they do get many fraudulent claims. In cases like this where fraudulent claims are frequent, they do tend to expect you to proof a little more than perhaps would be the case in other business areas. Unfortunatly, the try-it-on-as-you-have-nothing-to-lose brigade spoil it for the genuine people with genuine complaints.

I'm not making any judgement on your case as I dont know the information. Just remarking on how you probably made it harder for yourself in what you have said and why the FOS have responded as such.

Thanks for the information, on reading your response I can see how things I have written may not have been the right things. I can also see that people are trying it on, but I am a genuine case.
Do you have any thoughts on how I can move this forward, would be grateful for your help