FSCS - Compensation

busbyh

pinknico wrote: »

I dont believe that in Deloittes investigations they listened to phonecalls, they just asked for information on whether any PPI had been paid out or any refunds given.
Just my opinion on information given from Deloittes, not fact!

Hope so pinknico
Just when you are feeling up you get knocked down again:mad:

marshallka

busbyh wrote: »

Hope so pinknico
Just when you are feeling up you get knocked down again:mad:

Busbyh, don't feel you have been knocked down. Even if someone has been knocked back I would fight it all the way. The whole point of the supercomplaint was that these policies were actually not the cheapest option and when already in debt (as we would not go to these "sub prime type" lenders) this was a bit of a !!!! take really. They should have offered for consumers to buy cheaper. If you now had an offer of buying a single premium and it was sold like this, which is stating all that they should have done would you buy it??

You "can" protect your loan repayments with us, we are giving you a choice, we know just the product, its one that covers your loan for 5 years although we know its over 20 years but after 5 years we will sell you another one although you are still paying your first one (well all the interest on it anyway cause its really another loan......) at the same time as me selling you your second one (which again only covers 5 years) and then another and another. Also it most probably will not cover you but I have no interest in that at all as I am going to be earning a terrific profit from the commission I am getting from selling this to. I also forgot to add it only covers one of you although I want to put it to you that BOTH are liable to the repayments on it should anything happen and most probably we will never pay out on it as only "x" amounts of claims actually do. Just sign on the dotted line..


I think not as you now know and so do the autorities these policies were a complete and utter rip off and I really cannot see that any complaints of these should be turned down. If someone actually REALLY wanted one of these then perhaps they should also go for the whole loan back as this shows they are not of sound mind and body in my eyes. WHo in their right mind would want to pay these terrifically highly priced policies when they could get something the same for thousands cheaper, no penalties for cancelling and not a loan to buy it when already up to your eyes and also not secured to your property.

I never really could understand how PPI could be secured to a property...but of course once on the agreement its actually no different to another loan. They had us all.

busbyh

marshallka wrote: »

Busbyh, don't feel you have been knocked down. Even if someone has been knocked back I would fight it all the way. The whole point of the supercomplaint was that these policies were actually not the cheapest option and when already in debt (as we would not go to these "sub prime type" lenders) this was a bit of a !!!! take really. They should have offered for consumers to buy cheaper. If you now had an offer of buying a single premium and it was sold like this, which is stating all that they should have done would you buy it??

You "can" protect your loan repayments with us, we are giving you a choice, we know just the product, its one that covers your loan for 5 years although we know its over 20 years but after 5 years we will sell you another one although you are still paying your first one (well all the interest on it anyway cause its really another loan......) at the same time as me selling you your second one (which again only covers 5 years) and then another and another. Also it most probably will not cover you but I have no interest in that at all as I am going to be earning a terrific profit from the commission I am getting from selling this to. I also forgot to add it only covers one of you although I want to put it to you that BOTH are liable to the repayments on it should anything happen and most probably we will never pay out on it as only "x" amounts of claims actually do. Just sign on the dotted line..


I think not as you now know and so do the autorities these policies were a complete and utter rip off and I really cannot see that any complaints of these should be turned down. If someone actually REALLY wanted one of these then perhaps they should also go for the whole loan back as this shows they are not of sound mind and body in my eyes. WHo in their right mind would want to pay these terrifically highly priced policies when they could get something the same for thousands cheaper, no penalties for cancelling and not a loan to buy it when already up to your eyes and also not secured to your property.

I never really could understand how PPI could be secured to a property...but of course once on the agreement its actually no different to another loan. They had us all.

Thanks for taking the time out for writing this post marshallka. You have a really good point about ppi being secured against a property!! never thought of it that way.Surely this is another one in our favour.

Also as I have said in previous posts, the terms and conditions on the copy were amended to show the true cost of the loan, which was nowhere to be seen on the original. So obviously they had already had redress because of this

Thanks again

You've got it exactly right on that midddle paragraph

busbyh

have just been speaking to my niece who is a FA and told her about the case that was rejected by FSCS. She has made me feel a little better as she said, we don't know why this person was refused, she has seen cases where they have lied on the application. It could be any number of reasons
hopefully she is correct

honey2_2

Hi,

I have spoken to my friend, it is a member of their family who has received this letter. Apparently their main argument for their policy being miss sold was that they were adamant they were not asked about pre-existing conditions and they were not told about the policy being for 5 years.
Apparently the recorded calls show that they were told by the person from Picture at point of selling that pre-exisitng conditions would not be covered, however they were not told that the policy was for only 5 years and not for the entire term of the loan. They have received a trans script of the calls from about 3 or 4 years ago. Apparently as part of the claims process as much info as possible is looked at even all the recorded telephone conversations if they are available are listened to.
They are going to ask for their claim to be relooked at because they were not told about the policy only lasting 5 years.

I am always sceptical with info when it is friends of friends giving it to you - you are always not 100% sure that you are getting the true story as it goes from one person to the next. It is very true that people get embarrassed and don't alway give the full story.

Hope I have not upset anyone today but thought it was best to share what I had been told I am remaining up beat and positive that everyone's claim will be ok.

Honey2

busbyh

honey2 wrote: »

Hi,

I have spoken to my friend, it is a member of their family who has received this letter. Apparently their main argument for their policy being miss sold was that they were adamant they were not asked about pre-existing conditions and they were not told about the policy being for 5 years.
Apparently the recorded calls show that they were told by the person from Picture at point of selling that pre-exisitng conditions would not be covered, however they were not told that the policy was for only 5 years and not for the entire term of the loan. They have received a trans script of the calls from about 3 or 4 years ago. Apparently as part of the claims process as much info as possible is looked at even all the recorded telephone conversations if they are available are listened to.
They are going to ask for their claim to be relooked at because they were not told about the policy only lasting 5 years.

I am always sceptical with info when it is friends of friends giving it to you - you are always not 100% sure that you are getting the true story as it goes from one person to the next. It is very true that people get embarrassed and don't alway give the full story.

Hope I have not upset anyone today but thought it was best to share what I had been told I am remaining up beat and positive that everyone's claim will be ok.

Honey2

Thanks for taking the time out to explain this to us Honey2. yes it is best to share any information good or bad, as it can prepare us for the outcome
Surely they have a case re the 5year policy - hope so

honey2_2

I would think they would, at the end of the day if you are not told something as important as how long the PPI cover is for - They have said that they are going to take this all the way and will not give up!.

Honey2

marshallka

honey2 wrote: »

I would think they would, at the end of the day if you are not told something as important as how long the PPI cover is for - They have said that they are going to take this all the way and will not give up!.

Honey2

This is why it is best to include lots of reasons for misselling if they are applicable to you as if they only used the medical things (and lots on here do) or cause you are self employed (as again lots do) and they are your only reasons and they can be "argued" then your case is lost. The FSCS cannot add to your reasons either as that is not what they are there for (they have to remain impartial) and I bet there will be others here in the same boat maybe. I think given a second bash they should win.

pinknico

I take it back about phone calls! Really surprised they would have to do that!
Do you know if your friend was a priority or low reference number?

Think I may have to think about sending the extra information ! Now very scared!

honey2_2

Indeed - and be totally honest when completing the claim!

Honey2