PPI Reclaiming Discussion part 4

amersall

maxdp wrote: »

OK Have just heard from the FOS about a complaint I had with them about three loans I had with one provider. These Loans were not stand alone but were refinanced.

The standard way of working out the refunds were set by the FOS. I have, since earlier last year, been asking for the figures to be explained. My concerns have been that stand alone loans would be worked out differently that re financed Loans.

Anyway I understand that my case has now gone to the Ombudsman they are now considering whether they alter the ways that they are guiding the lenders to refinance the PPI's. There have also been other complaints gone in which have been similar.

Am pleased that this is getting sorted one way or the other. Fingers crossed anyway.

good luck to you max, i hope this doesnt drag out too long for you, its the waiting that gets you isnt it? it should be faster, send it to me i will sort it for you all upheld and money paid out within 7 days if i was in charge:D:D:D:D

gumbi

hairdresserA wrote: »

How did you do it? Thank you so much gumbi for this post you have given me more information than the FOS and FSCS together. Feel so much better now that I have a better understanding of the situation. Very happy lady!:T

Glad to be able help.....
Very simply I just asked the right questions when speaking with the FSCS.

I was under the mistaken assumption that they are a Government agency and therefore the enemy, however whilst they have a close relationship with the FSA they are independent and really are on the side of the consumer..

I'm lucky that I have a very good contact and I've mentioned this forum is full of people like me that are just looking for up to date information.

My advice when dealing with FSCS, FSA or FOS is to be persistent, polite but firm.

amersall

yonny wrote: »

Please feel free to move this if its in the wrong place!!

Sent a letter off to Northern Rock a few weeks ago and received this reply yesterday

-they cant find evidence to suggest misselling but dont want to be in dispute so will refund the PPI premiums
- as DH is in arrears with loan they will use refund of premiums to reduce debt
-they want to set up a new loan without PPI to be paid over 60 months
-remainder of premiums plus interest they will refund to DH once he has signed new credit agreement

DH has DMP with CCCS so cannot set up any new credit agreements and cant afford to increase what he's paying to them until back in employment
- but obviously would like his PPI refunded!!

NR say it is their final decision so should we go straight to the FOS or send NR another letter?
Any help or advice very gratefully received - thanks!:o

when you reloan they dont do a credit check and this is not new credit it is your old one without the ppi, and when you reloan you can go to the arrears dept and still get a reduced monthly payment, this happened to me, i told them to stuff it and went to fos as they were going to extend my loan by 7 years, they must put you back in the position you were with the loan before ppi was added . they can take arrears back from your payout, but if there is any money remaining they must give it to you, hope this helps and please keep me informed ta

maxdp

amersall wrote: »

good luck to you max, i hope this doesnt drag out too long for you, its the waiting that gets you isnt it? it should be faster, send it to me i will sort it for you all upheld and money paid out within 7 days if i was in charge:D:D:D:D

Tee Hee

Thank you Amersall, I know you would sort it for me quick:D I am just really pleased that they are looking into making new guidance on this point. I have been banging on about it wince middle of last year. My point is that if they refund the PPI on the first loan what they are not taking into consideration is that that PPI would have been included in the second loan when it was re financed and on and on.

Anyway fingers crossed and with any luck it will get sorted quickly. Will tell them otherwise I will get you on the case for me,.:p :rotfl:

pinknico

maxdp wrote: »

OK Have just heard from the FOS about a complaint I had with them about three loans I had with one provider. These Loans were not stand alone but were refinanced.

The standard way of working out the refunds were set by the FOS. I have, since earlier last year, been asking for the figures to be explained. My concerns have been that stand alone loans would be worked out differently that re financed Loans.

Anyway I understand that my case has now gone to the Ombudsman they are now considering whether they alter the ways that they are guiding the lenders to refinance the PPI's. There have also been other complaints gone in which have been similar.

Am pleased that this is getting sorted one way or the other. Fingers crossed anyway.

Goodluck with this Max, xx

pinknico

maxdp wrote: »

Tee Hee

Thank you Amersall, I know you would sort it for me quick:D I am just really pleased that they are looking into making new guidance on this point. I have been banging on about it wince middle of last year. My point is that if they refund the PPI on the first loan what they are not taking into consideration is that that PPI would have been included in the second loan when it was re financed and on and on.

Anyway fingers crossed and with any luck it will get sorted quickly. Will tell them otherwise I will get you on the case for me,.:p :rotfl:

Sounds like common sense to me, why would they think any different?

amersall

maxdp wrote: »

Tee Hee

Thank you Amersall, I know you would sort it for me quick:D I am just really pleased that they are looking into making new guidance on this point. I have been banging on about it wince middle of last year. My point is that if they refund the PPI on the first loan what they are not taking into consideration is that that PPI would have been included in the second loan when it was re financed and on and on.

Anyway fingers crossed and with any luck it will get sorted quickly. Will tell them otherwise I will get you on the case for me,.:p :rotfl:

they werent with first plus were they? as the ombudsman is not looking too kindly about ppi done twice i think you will most likely get both lots back, why would you claim for one lot of ppi and then let them put it on a second loan? they must think we are stupid. doh:p

maxdp

pinknico wrote: »

Sounds like common sense to me, why would they think any different?

See Pinknico it is womens logic.:rotfl:

maxdp

amersall wrote: »

they werent with first plus were they? as the ombudsman is not looking too kindly about ppi done twice i think you will most likely get both lots back, why would you claim for one lot of ppi and then let them put it on a second loan? they must think we are stupid. doh:p

No It is not with FP. This is high street Bank. No they have paid the PPI back from the loans but only worked it out as if they were stand alone. these were all refinanced and ran from one loan to the next etc so surely it would change the way it is worked out . Anyway I am glad it has been passed up to Ombudsman to get sorted for all of us.:D

di3004

Just found this here:

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/insurance/article.html?in_article_id=481259&in_page_id=4

The PPI loan sharks backed by the state

Jo Thornhill, Financial Mail
29 March 2009


Taxpayer-funded banks Lloyds TSB and Northern Rock are among the organisations unfairly rejecting customers' complaints about loan payment protection insurance, Financial Mail has found.
Turning a blind eye: Lloyds TSB rejected 95% of PPI complaints







Barclays, which has so far survived without a bailout, is also among the rogue banks.


All three banks are likely to be in breach of the watchdog's requirement to 'treat customers fairly' and all three are expected to be named and shamed later this year when, for the first time, the Financial Ombudsman Service publishes complaints volumes against individual financial firms.

Big fines could now be levied against these banks by the Financial Services Authority.



>> Should you claim back PPI yourself, or use a claims management company?

Research by Financial Mail has identified these banks ahead of the FOS's naming and shaming.

Our analysis is based on more than 5,000 complaints made to banks in the past six months about the alleged misselling of PPI.

It shows that Lloyds TSB rejected a staggering 95% of complaints and Northern Rock turned down 72% while Barclays declined 69%.

For complainants who are routinely rejected, the next step is the FOS where, in stark contrast to the obstinate stance of the banks, nine in ten complaints are upheld.

This discrepancy between the rejections by the banks and subsequent upholding of complaints by the FOS is 'clear evidence' that banks are spurning complaints out of hand, rather than assessing cases individually as regulations require them to do, the FOS has said.

PPI is insurance cover that is supposed to kick in if borrowers cannot meet loan repayments because of redundancy or illness.

It has been sold aggressively by loan providers in the past and is controversial because it is expensive, often costing as much as 30% of the total loan. It has proved hugely profitable for banks and in the case of Lloyds TSB has generated billions of pounds of profits.

But many borrowers were not told by the sales staff that the insurance was being added to their loan and often the cover was unsuitable, for example because the customer was self-employed or had an existing medical condition, which meant the insurance would never pay out.

The FOS will not confirm Financial Mail's findings or name individual banks at this stage, but has publicly criticised banks in general over their handling of PPI complaints and reported the problem to the FSA.

It now receives more than 500 PPI cases a week - three times more than a year ago - and has told the FSA that the rates at which it upholds customers' complaints is unacceptably high - as much as 100% in the case of one firm.

Claims management companies who are dealing with complaints on behalf of consumers, and taking a cut of any money won back, are at the frontline of the complaints process and are able to see patterns emerging in the way that complaints are rejected.

Two of the largest claims handlers provided the data underpinning Financial Mail's research. Of the eight major lenders examined as part of our investigation, five had rejection rates on PPI cases at more than 40%. The major banks all strenuously deny any wrongdoing.



THE PPI FIGHTBACK

Since 2006, This is Money has fought hard against the mis-selling of payment protection insurance and helped thousands of people reclaim premiums...


Lloyds TSB, as the worst offender, insists that complaints are fairly handled, despite our evidence that almost all are thrown out. Barclays insists PPI provides 'valuable cover' to many of its customers while Northern Rock rejects the findings and says it would be 'inaccurate' to suggest the survey reflects its overall position on PPI.

Adam Thomsett, director at claims company challengeyour.com, says: 'These banks are not dealing with complaints properly, failing to give them the time and consideration they deserve.' Steve Bloor at claims company Give Me My Money says his company has not lost any PPI misselling claim that has been referred to the Ombudsman.

'Either the lender has conceded before a formal adjudication, or the FOS found in favour of the consumer,' he says.
'In my view, high rejection rates are a deliberate tactic by lenders to try to get consumers to give up their claim.' Theresa Fritz at consumer lobby group Which? says she is not surprised by Financial Mail's findings.

'The Ombudsman would not be upholding nine out of ten cases if complaints were being dealt with properly,' she says.




£1,500 of cover that I didn't want
Lloyds TSB says it handles all PPI complaints fairly, but try telling that to Pat Shah.

The 51-year-old hospital receptionist (pictured above) has been waiting since last November for a final decision on her PPI misselling case against the bank.

When Pat, from Bournemouth, Dorset, first complained, Lloyds TSB flatly rejected her claim, even though Pat says she was never told about the PPI cover at the time she took out her loan with the bank. Cover costing £1,500 was added to a £6,000 personal loan she took out in September 2007.

'I have worked for the NHS for seven years so I get paid sick leave for up to six months,' says Pat, who has a grown-up daughter and two grandchildren. 'If I lost my job I would get a redundancy payout. I'd never have signed up to such expensive insurance that I don't need.
It was never spelt out to me that this cover was being added to my loan.' Pat's case was referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service last month and she was told last Wednesday that it had ruled in her favour so she will now get a full refund of her PPI premiums, plus interest.
EXPERT ADVICE ON...