Companies in Default/FSCS Claims - Picture, London Scottish, Twopart

marshallka

honey2 wrote: »

I said I take it that means my claim for compensation with the FSCS has not been successful - she said I do not know what the decision is in relation to your claim - but the letter will be posted to you on Friday coming and you will receive everything you need - if you then wish to claim then you may do so with the Picture insurance - she just kept repeating the same thing over and over. I am so confused!

Honey 2 x

Quite the opposite could be Honey. Posted on the page before.

chickpee

honey2 wrote: »

She called me back and said On Friday of this week the FSCS will be posting a letter to me which will have everything I need!! She then said once you have received that letter you may if you wish contact the insurance company and make a claim against your policy for redundancy

Honey 2 x

Surely if you make a claim against the policy then it isn't classed as mis-sold?

Hope the letter brings you good news!

marshallka

chickpee wrote: »

Surely if you make a claim against the policy then it isn't classed as mis-sold?

Hope the letter brings you good news!

The FSA have bought in new proposals which come into force in Jan 2010. In this you can still be missold even if you make a claim cause you HAD to buy the policy that you did and then had no money to buy what you wanted to or choice of getting a stand alone policy.

busbyh

honey2 wrote: »

Guys

I have just had the strangest telephone conversatiom with the lady from the FSCS.

Honey 2 x

Don't keep us in suspense!!!! what was it;)

busbyh

gumbi wrote: »

Diaylsis,
Have you tried refering your creditors the FSCS or even copying them in on any emails you send.....That way they will see where the delay is and may even be able to excert some pressure themselves..



I have found that the best way to beat a monster is get a monster of your own to fight for you.....It's a lot easier to fob off an individual than it is a corporation with some financial and legal clout;)

EXCELLENT ADVICE GUMBI:beer:

marshallka

This is from the new proposals


Claims and their impact on redress
3.11 Where the firm finds that the consumer would not have bought any PPI policy, but
the firm has previously paid out on one or more claims on the policy, the firm may
deduct the value of those claims from the redress it pays the consumer.
3.12 Where, however, the firm finds that the consumer would have bought an alternative
regular premium policy, such paid claims should not be deducted from the redress,
as they are merely claims on the policy the consumer would have had.
3.13 More generally, where a complaint raises (explicitly or implicitly) potential issues
around exclusions or eligibility and their disclosure, then irrespective of whether the
main focus of the complaint is on the original sale or a subsequently rejected claim,
the firm should consider whether the same potential deficiency affected both the sale
and the rejection of any subsequent claim, and fairly redress the consumer accordingly.
This should include now paying the claim where appropriate. Where the basic redress
due to the complainant is the full return of premiums, but there is also a claim to be

paid, the firm should pay the larger of the premiums or the claim(s).

honey2_2

busbyh wrote: »

Don't keep us in suspense!!!! what was it;)

Hi there,

I posted what they said - my pc is playing up - did it not load properly?

Honey2 x

busbyh

dialysis wrote: »

I thinks omeone from the fscs 'SHOT THE PIGEON':rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

really made me laugh, that one di:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

busbyh

marshallka wrote: »

Its only if you used a broker to get the loan from Picture that your complaint lies with a broker.


Did any of you use a broker???

No, thank goodness!!, it's bad enough just going through Picture:mad:

marshallka

Honey, they look to be taking time to get through the complaints and as you most probably HAD to buy the picture policy leaving you with no spare cash to buy whatever you wanted to buy (if any insurance was needed) then they are still allowing complaints and treating them as missold when someone has made a claim.

Would you have actually purchased this single premium policy that had interest on it? I don't think so but there was perhaps a chance that you would have purchased something else that was a lot less money. This is why it still can be missold to you but you have no options (sometimes) than to make a claim. You would not be claiming on a picture policy if you had another policy or the money and choice to purchase another policy. That is how I see it from reading the link of the new rules from the FSA in making redress's.

I am not 100% but the link is there for you to read.

It ain't over yet....