Lloyds Loan back in 2001

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

jackyboy wrote: »

I'm sure if he'd been sick he would have claimed on the insurance, so if he gets the money back he did get the (admittedly pretty rubbish) protection for free during this time.

The sooner he forgets about free money and concentrates on going through the correct procedures to claiming back mis-sold insurance, the better.

If the OP had taken out the loan and WANTED the PPI, then went on to claim on the PPI but couldn't due to claiming for a pre-existing condition and it wasn't pointed out to him at the application stage that he'd not be able to do so, what would your opinion of the legality of the loan itself be?

It may be that the OP wanted the loan but would only take it if he knew that he was protected under all circumstances e.g.

If he's working - he has the income to pay.
If he's off sick - he has the sickness benefit.
If he's made redundant - he has the unemployment benefit.
If he dies - he has the life assurance benefit.

If he was only prepared to take the loan so long as he had full protection and yet he was sold the policy and didn't have it disclosed to him that he didn't have full protection, then that, IMO, constitutes a mis-sell of the entire loan and PPI.

petermb_2

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

If the OP had taken out the loan and WANTED the PPI, then went on to claim on the PPI but couldn't due to claiming for a pre-existing condition and it wasn't pointed out to him at the application stage that he'd not be able to do so, what would your opinion of the legality of the loan itself be?

It may be that the OP wanted the loan but would only take it if he knew that he was protected under all circumstances e.g.

If he's working - he has the income to pay.
If he's off sick - he has the sickness benefit.
If he's made redundant - he has the unemployment benefit.
If he dies - he has the life assurance benefit.

If he was only prepared to take the loan so long as he had full protection and yet he was sold the policy and didn't have it disclosed to him that he didn't have full protection, then that, IMO, constitutes a mis-sell of the entire loan and PPI.

I agree with where you are coming from but there would have to be proof that the PPI was in fact a nessessity in the borrower's opinion. This would mean that there would have to be a recording of the conversation or a copy of the application form.

There are definitely issues to proceed with against the lender but I would not like to commit to the loan being written off or made unenforceable. Voidability is far more likely.

Google

Hi guys Let me ask if any of u watched the "Panorama prog" where the couple wrote off alot of there loans and credit cards due to stuff to do with the agreements not being correct in some way or another

They were chargin me £66 a month for the PPI over 5 yrs
total loan repayments were £385.02 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7730000/newsid_7735000/7735062.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=6&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2
The Link for the Panorama

Google

Another thing others on the forum have said sum banks dont even have the agreemenet themself anymore, so therfore the loan can be void if I amm correct, after 6 yrs

Google

jackyboy wrote: »

If he thinks that because his copy of the loan agreement doesn't have his signature on it then he can have the loan written off, then he's living in cloud cuckoo land. Customer copies don't have the signature on, they're simply copies of the agreement. They will have copies of the agreement with his signature and even if they didn't, they'd have records of the money going into the account and him spending it, CCTV footage of him signing the loan agreement, etc etc.

Sorry m8 CCTV from 2001 I dont think so, if you say the coustomer copy does not have cust sig ok, what if I ask the bank to send me the copy of the agreement and find they say the dont have it then again the loan is void and can be written off as in the panorama, but I do understand every case is different

petermb_2

The lender must have a copy of the agreement between lender and borrower. Many lenders do not keep the agreement or lose it. Sadly if the lender cannot provide a copy of the agreement upon request then the loan becomes unenforceable until such time as the lender has complied.

To do this you need to write to the lender requesting a copy of the agreement under section 77 of the Consumer credit Act 1974. In your letter you should state that they have 12 days to comply to your request and that should they fail to do so the loan will become unenforceable until they do. You must enclose a cheque or postal order for £1.

Google

wen the loan was taken the salewoman said I need to have the PPI in order to take the loan, defo 1 of the mis selling traits. add the rest, application will not succeed, will not be able to continue with the application Mis selling Mis selling all the way

~Brock~

How long was the loan taken out over?

Google

Google wrote: »

They were chargin me £66 a month for the PPI over 5 yrs
total loan repayments were £385.02 pm

60 months

5 yrs back in 2001

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

If it's already been paid off, then you'll not get the loan money back or written off as it's not there any more.

The PPI however, may get refunded + 8% interest per year as far as I'm aware.