PPI Reclaiming Discussion part 4

amersall

saintsfan1 wrote: »

I received 2 replys today. one from Northern Rock saying that they are looking into it and acknowledge that they have 8 weeks.
The second was from Santander regarding my wifes store card. They have included a copy of her signed agreement which to our surprise was back in 2001. It shows that my wife did sign for the protection. and they state that as my wife did not use the 30 day no quibble guarentee to cancel and that we should have had a policy. We have never had a policy document. they do say that they have no record of what went on in the store but we still could have cancelled. They go on to say that they cannot find any evidence of mis selling so they will not refund and that this is their final responce. If I am dissatisfied I can go to the FLA.
Can anybody advise if I should carry on on give up on this one.

I am very suprised that they found this agreement from 2001,it just goes to show that when it benefits them (as in your wifes case, to prove a no mis sell) then they can come up with data from more than 10 years ago.
If it is signed by your wife i would think this will be a no go, as they have stated, you would have had 30 days to cancel this insurance, and if this ppi is put on the card monthly then the argument would be "you should have noticed this sooner".
You could give it one last attempt with other reasons you think you were mis sold this. Hopefully someone will post who can give you a nudge in the right direction.Good luck with NR hope you have a win with these.

Rockbird_2

Rockbird wrote: »

Hi there

Further to my previous post above, I've received and returned a form from the FOS, together with copies of the breakdown and last letter I received from MBNA. This was done on 23rd August and I got a certificate of posting.

Would it be out of order for me to contact them to make sure they've received my form? I haven't received an acknowledgement from them, but equally don't want to chase them up if it's too soon to. I'm sitting here wondering what's going on...!

Just thought I'd give a little update...

I referred my complaint to the FOS and had a phone call a few months back to clarify the details of my complaint, which was that I felt that I was not put in the position I would have been in if I had not been charged PPI (the example statement I quoted gives an example of this). After clarifying, I was told that the calculation was made according to the rules, but the person I spoke to could see where I was coming from. I said that I would, at the very least like an apology from MBNA for the inconvenience caused. I still am paying the loan off and I'm pretty sure had PPI not been there I would be paying a heck of a lot less interest by now.

Anway, fast forward to yesterday, I received another call from the FOS to say that they had requested an apology be issued to me by MBNA and MBNA had said that they were prepared to issue a letter apologising for incorrectly calculating my refund. My response was along the lines: 'so they are willing to apologise, but not to rectify their mistake?'

The upshot of this was that I have now said that I was going to refuse the apology and the FOS person is going to look into my complain herself and make a decision. She may still agree with the bank, but my answer was that I would rather accept a decision from a neutral. It may not get me any more money back (which I strongly feel IS due), but at least it's being looked into and may - you never know - help someone else's claim.

amersall

Fingers crossed for you ROCKBIRD hope you get the result you want.

klflosser

amersall wrote: »

Did you do this in the store or online, have you a copy of the agreement?.

If you did this online some of these agreements have the box pre ticked and you have to untick if you do not want ppi.
When you get the letter back saying "you ticked the box", if you did it in store then you would not have had the ppi explained to you as a sales assistant (in my opinion) would not have the knowledge about this product and would not have asked you relevent questions, eg is this suitable for you, are you working or are there any outstanding medical problems you have that this ppi would not cover.

Do you usually take ppi on other financial products,do you get sick pay, were you unemployed at the time?.
These are all questions that need to be looked at.

I took the Store Card out in September 2003 and remember the sales lady completing the paperwork, which I signed. I still have the original. I am not disputing that PPI was ticked and am sure she offered it to me before ticking the box. I made it quite clear at the time that I was self-employed but was still asked for an employer's address. As I didn't have one she asked for an address where I worked.

When looking at previous paperwork recently I read the very small print on the back and it states that you must be employed. It also says pre-existing medical conditions not covered.

Argos letter received today says "Our advisors did not provide guidance or advice but arranged for policy documentation to be sent... and allowed you to make an informed decision".

As they state, they certainly did not provide guidance and I do not recollect receiving any policy documentation at a later date. (Same place as last letter they purported to have sent?)

I will write again as still feel I was sold something that was completely useless to me as self employed, probably at that time working less than 16 hours a week, and had pre-existing medical problems. Even if they are not giving advice, surely in 2003 one can expect the "advisor" to have a limited knowledge re employment status and medical conditions?

Footiemad_2

Rockbird wrote: »

Just thought I'd give a little update...

I referred my complaint to the FOS and had a phone call a few months back to clarify the details of my complaint, which was that I felt that I was not put in the position I would have been in if I had not been charged PPI (the example statement I quoted gives an example of this). After clarifying, I was told that the calculation was made according to the rules, but the person I spoke to could see where I was coming from. I said that I would, at the very least like an apology from MBNA for the inconvenience caused. I still am paying the loan off and I'm pretty sure had PPI not been there I would be paying a heck of a lot less interest by now.

Anway, fast forward to yesterday, I received another call from the FOS to say that they had requested an apology be issued to me by MBNA and MBNA had said that they were prepared to issue a letter apologising for incorrectly calculating my refund. My response was along the lines: 'so they are willing to apologise, but not to rectify their mistake?'

The upshot of this was that I have now said that I was going to refuse the apology and the FOS person is going to look into my complain herself and make a decision. She may still agree with the bank, but my answer was that I would rather accept a decision from a neutral. It may not get me any more money back (which I strongly feel IS due), but at least it's being looked into and may - you never know - help someone else's claim.

An apology would be "nice" but the pennies back in your pocket would be even better. Fingers crossed for you on both counts.;):D

amersall

klflosser wrote: »

I took the Store Card out in September 2003 and remember the sales lady completing the paperwork, which I signed. I still have the original. I am not disputing that PPI was ticked and am sure she offered it to me before ticking the box. I made it quite clear at the time that I was self-employed but was still asked for an employer's address. As I didn't have one she asked for an address where I worked.

When looking at previous paperwork recently I read the very small print on the back and it states that you must be employed. It also says pre-existing medical conditions not covered.

Argos letter received today says "Our advisors did not provide guidance or advice but arranged for policy documentation to be sent... and allowed you to make an informed decision".

As they state, they certainly did not provide guidance and I do not recollect receiving any policy documentation at a later date. (Same place as last letter they purported to have sent?)

I will write again as still feel I was sold something that was completely useless to me as self employed, probably at that time working less than 16 hours a week, and had pre-existing medical problems. Even if they are not giving advice, surely in 2003 one can expect the "advisor" to have a limited knowledge re employment status and medical conditions?

Hi there, i would give it another go, the "sales assistant", even though she may have mentioned the ppi would not have the status to in effect "sell" you this product, the "employed" and "pre existing" medical conditions are good reasons too.
Put it to them, that you would not have taken ppi with the exclusions that applied, why would you pay for something that you have no use for?. Good luck with this and please keep us posted.

olly_olsen

I wrote to HSBC at the start of December last year seeking repayment for loan protection that I believe was mis-sold to me in 2004.

I received a reasonably prompt reply saying they would look at my claim and endeavour to respond within eight weeks.

I received another letter dated the 16th Feb (ten weeks after I wrote to them) saying they were still 'investigating' and weren't able to provide a full response. They did, however, commit to a full response by the 16th March.

On the 9th March I received another letter saying they were still 'investigating' and thanking me for my patience. The letter also gave a number I could call with any queries...

As it is now fifteen weeks since I wrote to HSBC I decided to call them and was told that they had a large backlog and that I should expect to hear something within the next two weeks. They also said that they were waiting for the result of a court case that should be through at the end of this month and that this would inform how they responded in many cases.

Can anyone tell me what court case they might be referring to and what I should do next? Should I now take it to the Ombudsman?

Thanks

the_knitting_drummer

olly_olsen wrote: »

I wrote to HSBC at the start of December last year seeking repayment for loan protection that I believe was mis-sold to me in 2004.

I received a reasonably prompt reply saying they would look at my claim and endeavour to respond within eight weeks.

I received another letter dated the 16th Feb (ten weeks after I wrote to them) saying they were still 'investigating' and weren't able to provide a full response. They did, however, commit to a full response by the 16th March.

On the 9th March I received another letter saying they were still 'investigating' and thanking me for my patience. The letter also gave a number I could call with any queries...

As it is now fifteen weeks since I wrote to HSBC I decided to call them and was told that they had a large backlog and that I should expect to hear something within the next two weeks. They also said that they were waiting for the result of a court case that should be through at the end of this month and that this would inform how they responded in many cases.

Can anyone tell me what court case they might be referring to and what I should do next? Should I now take it to the Ombudsman?

Thanks

They would be referring to this court case:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/7da0f454-d6ae-11df-98a9-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1Hd8SAGh2

The Ombudsman won't be able to help you my friend.

olly_olsen

Thanks for your reply.

The article you referred me to says that banks are obliged to continue to deal with cases whilst the court case goes on.

the_knitting_drummer

olly_olsen wrote: »

Thanks for your reply.

The article you referred me to says that banks are obliged to continue to deal with cases whilst the court case goes on.

They were supposed to, but banks being banks, most of them didn't pay any attention to that. HSBC are one of the worst, and seem to be ignoring the FOS too.