PPI Reclaiming discussion Part III

marshallka

Just found this on the CAG

Might help anyone getting a court case together

d) The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;
i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments
ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit
iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit
iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

Di from I read it was PC World that sold the agreement and the PPI. Why do you say it was not PC World...

Think it was just the way Di worded the sentence.:D

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

lol, no hun I am not saying it was not PC World, I just did not know you could pursue through these, I thought it would have been who was on the agreement, but now I can't see why not if PC world sold it.;) Then go through them.

Di, you really have lost me here... If it was who was on the agreement that you made the claim through then we would not be messing about with the brokers...sellers etc .

dreamer33

marshallka wrote: »

I was told after speaking to the manager at the Ombudsman about the unfair rebate that he would write to the Insurance company and ask for a final response and they would first have to find out from Firstplus who the underwriters of the insurance were. Now what worries me is what I want to state in my complaint is not going to be stated here...

Me being impatient made the call to Firstplus on Monday and was told that it would only get thrown back to me as this type of complaint for an unfair rebate goes to the broker as the broker would have explained the rebate to me in a telephone conversation. I have it in writing from the so called broker that they did a non advised sale of the PPI which means nothing was discussed with me.

I then got back with this information from Firstplus to the person that sent the email from the Ombudsman about me having to state my claim to the insurer and she got back two days ago with this.

Thank you for your email below. Further to your conversation with A******, I have made contact with Firstplus to request confirmation of who the underwriter was for your PPI policy. I will contact you as soon as I have received this information.

In the meantime, I thank you for your patience...

I find this very interesing marshallka, I have a telephone call whereby the broker actually says he strongly advises and recommends the ppi. They state if you don't ask any questions then the broker does not have to ask any questions, very unfair relationship. FISA actually confirmed this was correct.

It is correct to say that these companies know the consumer cannot go to FOS and that they are not regulated so they get away with it and abuse the position, however they have a fight on their hands, keep going no matter what x

dreamer33

Marshallka it would not suprise me if we had the same broker :eek:

off out now catch up later

marshallka

maxdp wrote: »

Think it was just the way Di worded the sentence.:D

and me in my sentence too there...:D

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Di, you really have lost me here... If it was who was on the agreement that you made the claim through then we would not be messing about with the brokers...sellers etc .

Yeah your right, its me hun, getting all confussed with all this lately with the unfair rebate issues then the mis selling.......oops.......:o ........and have so much going on round me right now, which does not help with the concentration.....:rolleyes: lol.

If mis selling its the ones who arranged it, so pc world are responsible for this sale.;)

I do think and hope Pinkaddict will be back soon, with a bit of luck, and she will get my pm on this too.;)

maxdp

Hi Marshallka have now been able to reply to your last message.:D

marshallka

dreamer33 wrote: »

I find this very interesing marshallka, I have a telephone call whereby the broker actually says he strongly advises and recommends the ppi. They state if you don't ask any questions then the broker does not have to ask any questions, very unfair relationship. FISA actually confirmed this was correct.

It is correct to say that these companies know the consumer cannot go to FOS and that they are not regulated so they get away with it and abuse the position, however they have a fight on their hands, keep going no matter what x

Yes, they do abuse their positions.. especially if they know you have no recource with anyone... I can't really remember using a broker at all if truth be known and also the PPI was not optional. I want this rebate sorting now through the FOS and want to know that it is definately under the jurisidiction of them. I am getting annoyed with everyone involved here, including FOS too.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

I am off for a little while, I have so many here in my house right now I have a job to think, bit of an headache too......:mad: , so will have a breather and back soon.:D . xxx

Enjoy the company.... It may be a break you need..