PPI Reclaiming Discussion part 4

Rockbird_2

Hi all.

Well, today, I have received a breakdown and a covering letter from MBNA. The breakdown shows PPC and interest going back to 31/1/04 right up to when I stopped it in June this year.

The covering letter has a paragraph that says:

"I feel that we have made this decision in accordance with Financial Ombudsman Service, who state that we must place the account back in the position that it would have been in PPC had not been charged. As we have refunded the full value of premiums, and subsequent interest on these premiums, since the inception of the policy, we are confident that we have fulfilled the obligation and followed the relevant procedure in this case."

It goes on to say that the complaint process is exhausted and no further correspondence will be entered into, etc. (which is also what the very first letter from them also said, btw) and that I can refer to the FOS within 6 months.

As you might recall, I had requested any refund be sent to me by cheque. So my question is (because I don't have a head for figures!): if my account had been 'placed back in the position that it would have been', then surely the extra payments I was making, that covered at least the minimum amount (including PPC) would have reduced the interest on my actual loan amount, thereby reducing my loan and, therefore, minimum payments even further?

For example, say my monthly minimum payment was £200 and included, say, £50 PPC; by the paying £200 minimum payment required, had I not had to pay for PPC, the outstanding loan would have been reduced by £200 and not just £150 and, with it, further reduced subsequent minimum payments.

Not only that, but they have still only refunded my credit card account. It may be, what they regard as 'in the position that it would have been', etc., but I AM NOT!

I don't want to sound ungrateful, because my monthly payments are over £100 less a month now, but this still doesn't seem quite right to me - unless I have got it completely wrong (which I wouldn't be surprised at, given my brain-power when it comes to figures!!!) - so, I would be grateful if one of you lovely 'experts' would give me your take on this. As you say, 'remember, it's your money'...!

Oh, and thank you so much for all the help and advice I have received so far. I would not have even got this far without it x

Rockbird wrote: »

Hi, thanks.

No the only letter I got was the one offering the 'goodwill gesture', which also stated that they would refund to my account and no further correspondence would be entered into. This was the letter that prompted my response above, requesting the full breakdown and cheque as well as a response to my initial request for details of insurance that I originally sent to A&L.

The letter I received following that request was dealt with, and signed by, a different case officer, so I am going to assume that they are going ahead with my request and that I will get the full breakdown and details of insurance going back (I had also sent the FOS questionnaire, btw, which is what, I think, prompted the 'goodwill gesture').

I guess it might be a good idea for me to await the response that has been promised within 28 days and go from there. I'm just a little concerned that there might be a time bar, though I can't seem to find anything to suggest there might be.

Do you think it's worth my asking for a refund by cheque, whereby they would put the PPI refund back on my account and then send me a cheque, or am I pushing my luck?

bugsy161

Rockbird wrote: »

Hi all.

Well, today, I have received a breakdown and a covering letter from MBNA. The breakdown shows PPC and interest going back to 31/1/04 right up to when I stopped it in June this year.

The covering letter has a paragraph that says:

"I feel that we have made this decision in accordance with Financial Ombudsman Service, who state that we must place the account back in the position that it would have been in PPC had not been charged. As we have refunded the full value of premiums, and subsequent interest on these premiums, since the inception of the policy, we are confident that we have fulfilled the obligation and followed the relevant procedure in this case."

It goes on to say that the complaint process is exhausted and no further correspondence will be entered into, etc. (which is also what the very first letter from them also said, btw) and that I can refer to the FOS within 6 months.

As you might recall, I had requested any refund be sent to me by cheque. So my question is (because I don't have a head for figures!): if my account had been 'placed back in the position that it would have been', then surely the extra payments I was making, that covered at least the minimum amount (including PPC) would have reduced the interest on my actual loan amount, thereby reducing my loan and, therefore, minimum payments even further?

For example, say my monthly minimum payment was £200 and included, say, £50 PPC; by the paying £200 minimum payment required, had I not had to pay for PPC, the outstanding loan would have been reduced by £200 and not just £150 and, with it, further reduced subsequent minimum payments.

Not only that, but they have still only refunded my credit card account. It may be, what they regard as 'in the position that it would have been', etc., but I AM NOT!

I don't want to sound ungrateful, because my monthly payments are over £100 less a month now, but this still doesn't seem quite right to me - unless I have got it completely wrong (which I wouldn't be surprised at, given my brain-power when it comes to figures!!!) - so, I would be grateful if one of you lovely 'experts' would give me your take on this. As you say, 'remember, it's your money'...!

Oh, and thank you so much for all the help and advice I have received so far. I would not have even got this far without it x

I am awaiting my refund from Lloyds TSB following my win from the FOS.
The FOS have set rules for redress, as I am sure that you are aware, but in my case the Ombudsman added a 'caveat' for Lloyds.
He told them the usual, that they must put me in a position that I would be had I not taken the policy out, plus the interest, however, he also told them to recalculate all of the payments I made each month, over the last 23 years, with the PPI and interest removed, therefore reducing the monthly balance accordingly.
I waited nearly 3 years for the FOS decision which is why they may have added this caveat on. Best thing to do is have a word with the FOS.
I have also asked for a cheque because I dont trust Lloyds and feel that, if they credit my card first they will then reduce, or even remove my limit which, in essence is my money that they are due to reimburse me.

Rockbird_2

bugsy161 wrote: »

I am awaiting my refund from Lloyds TSB following my win from the FOS.
The FOS have set rules for redress, as I am sure that you are aware, but in my case the Ombudsman added a 'caveat' for Lloyds.
He told them the usual, that they must put me in a position that I would be had I not taken the policy out, plus the interest, however, he also told them to recalculate all of the payments I made each month, over the last 23 years, with the PPI and interest removed, therefore reducing the monthly balance accordingly.
I waited nearly 3 years for the FOS decision which is why they may have added this caveat on. Best thing to do is have a word with the FOS.
I have also asked for a cheque because I dont trust Lloyds and feel that, if they credit my card first they will then reduce, or even remove my limit which, in essence is my money that they are due to reimburse me.

Thank you for that. I phoned the FOS and they have said that they will look at the calculations. They couldn't tell me whether my reasoning about my balance/minimum payments was correct without my doing this, so I'm having a form sent out from them to start the process.

I asked how long it's likely to take and was told 2-6 months, so that makes your wait pretty long...!

Thanks again and good luck with your cheque as well!

bugsy161

Rockbird wrote: »

Thank you for that. I phoned the FOS and they have said that they will look at the calculations. They couldn't tell me whether my reasoning about my balance/minimum payments was correct without my doing this, so I'm having a form sent out from them to start the process.

I asked how long it's likely to take and was told 2-6 months, so that makes your wait pretty long...!

Thanks again and good luck with your cheque as well!

The problem is that the likes of MBNA will do the minimum they have to do in order to pay redress.
If they stick to the FOS guidelines they know they are 'playing by the rules' because if it actually went to the FOS and it was upheld it will cost them a fine plus more potential redress including potential distress and inconvenience payments.
I agree with you that your payments should be recalculated, minus the PPI and interest, to reduce your balance each month but, unless it is a binding decision by the FOS, there will be very few banks who will even offer to do it.
I would certainly fight for your right to have a cheque from them.

amersall

marshallka wrote: »

Hi amersall, don't know if this has been answered now but will take a look through the thread later. SOrry, missed the posts....;)

Cheers marshalka, you are a love :A thank you x

Rockbird_2

bugsy161 wrote: »

The problem is that the likes of MBNA will do the minimum they have to do in order to pay redress.
If they stick to the FOS guidelines they know they are 'playing by the rules' because if it actually went to the FOS and it was upheld it will cost them a fine plus more potential redress including potential distress and inconvenience payments.
I agree with you that your payments should be recalculated, minus the PPI and interest, to reduce your balance each month but, unless it is a binding decision by the FOS, there will be very few banks who will even offer to do it.
I would certainly fight for your right to have a cheque from them.

Ah, now I understand what they're up to. I thought they were quite good being so quick, compared to others I've seen on this site. Yes, I will hold out for a cheque for any other arrears, as it looks as though there will be some more due!

It makes you wonder why they've only done the minimum - I've told them in my letters that I would refer to FOS if I wasn't satisfied, so now they're going to have extra hassle and, as you say, more expenses as a result!

amersall

Rockbird wrote: »

Hi all.

Well, today, I have received a breakdown and a covering letter from MBNA. The breakdown shows PPC and interest going back to 31/1/04 right up to when I stopped it in June this year.

The covering letter has a paragraph that says:

"I feel that we have made this decision in accordance with Financial Ombudsman Service, who state that we must place the account back in the position that it would have been in PPC had not been charged. As we have refunded the full value of premiums, and subsequent interest on these premiums, since the inception of the policy, we are confident that we have fulfilled the obligation and followed the relevant procedure in this case."

It goes on to say that the complaint process is exhausted and no further correspondence will be entered into, etc. (which is also what the very first letter from them also said, btw) and that I can refer to the FOS within 6 months.

As you might recall, I had requested any refund be sent to me by cheque. So my question is (because I don't have a head for figures!): if my account had been 'placed back in the position that it would have been', then surely the extra payments I was making, that covered at least the minimum amount (including PPC) would have reduced the interest on my actual loan amount, thereby reducing my loan and, therefore, minimum payments even further?

For example, say my monthly minimum payment was £200 and included, say, £50 PPC; by the paying £200 minimum payment required, had I not had to pay for PPC, the outstanding loan would have been reduced by £200 and not just £150 and, with it, further reduced subsequent minimum payments.

Not only that, but they have still only refunded my credit card account. It may be, what they regard as 'in the position that it would have been', etc., but I AM NOT!

I don't want to sound ungrateful, because my monthly payments are over £100 less a month now, but this still doesn't seem quite right to me - unless I have got it completely wrong (which I wouldn't be surprised at, given my brain-power when it comes to figures!!!) - so, I would be grateful if one of you lovely 'experts' would give me your take on this. As you say, 'remember, it's your money'...!

Oh, and thank you so much for all the help and advice I have received so far. I would not have even got this far without it x

Hi there, first of all well done on your win :j:jThe way i look at this is, the loan was £150 and you paid £150 so this will have reduced your balance by this each month less interest, (same if you overpay your loan will reduce by the overpayment less interest )so this should not impact on your ppi as you have been given that back and the interest.So , by my logic your loan is back to the position it would have been in without ppi as the loan part doesnt have any bearing on the ppi part. Hope you understand what i am saying :rotfl: if i am wrong i am sure someone will be along to put me right

nickybutch

HI all,
I just had ameesgae back from the FOS saying that a person from EGG has CONTACTED me DIRECTLY and said that they have sorted out my queries.

BY THE HELL, THEY HAVEN'T!!!!
NO ONE FROM EGG HAS CONTACTED ME TODAY OR OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS!!
THANKS FOR LYING FINANCIAL OMBUDSMAN.

Any fresh ideas ?
NIckybutch

marshallka

amersall wrote: »

Hi poker player. Have worked 8% out to marshalkas figure to find out ppi monthly payment.I worked this out to be 132.96 a month, if i am wrong marshalka hopefully x will put me right !

8% on each payment from march 2004 to july 2010 is, according to the bank charges calc. £2,693.36 hope this helps, i have printed the calculations off in case the 8% fp give you is wrong, i can post this to you if you need them.

Phew, just finished that one Amersall and you are SPOT on:T:T.

Thanks....:)

Pedro303

di3004 wrote: »

Yes good idea on holding back on the cancellation of the PPI, sorry I did not think this when previously posting to you lol, cheers amersall.:D:beer:

Address wise I assumed it was this one below, but post it by recorded delivery and they should anyway forward your complaint on to the relevant section for you.

HSBC registered office at:

HSBC Bank Plc
8 Canada Square,
London,
E14 5HQ

Good luck.;)

Hi Di and amersall,

Well I posted off my three hsbc claim forms (three separate envelopes to the address above and got proof of postage) but that was now 8 weeks ago, and have heard nothing!

Should I chase hsbc to see where they are?

Thanks

Peter