MSE News: PPI misselling leads to £8,000 debt write-off

belle60

Hi i am new to this so bear with me! i'm dealing with a claim to the MBNA i was paying approx £41.00p per month PPI to them which i cancelled last year '2008' since Jan 2001 i was paying it unwittingly and self employed at the time!:eek: it was more than this lady who has had her debt written off! i have recently made a claim to the MBNA and they have written to me this morning offering £2500.00p and have taken it off the balance i owe, i'm sure it should be more, do i accept or fight on?
thanks in advance x

Paul_Herring

belle60 wrote: »

Hi i am new to this so bear with me! i'm dealing with a claim to the MBNA i was paying approx £41.00p per month PPI to them which i cancelled last year '2008' since Jan 2001 i was paying it unwittingly and self employed at the time!:eek: it was more than this lady who has had her debt written off! i have recently made a claim to the MBNA and they have written to me this morning offering £2500.00p and have taken it off the balance i owe, i'm sure it should be more, do i accept or fight on?
thanks in advance x

Well 7 years x 12 months x £41 is £3,444. That's not including interest.

If it were me, I'd be interested in how MBNA came up with the £2500 figure.

Balbvs

belle60 wrote: »

Hi i am new to this so bear with me! i'm dealing with a claim to the MBNA i was paying approx £41.00p per month PPI to them which i cancelled last year '2008' since Jan 2001 i was paying it unwittingly and self employed at the time!:eek: it was more than this lady who has had her debt written off! i have recently made a claim to the MBNA and they have written to me this morning offering £2500.00p and have taken it off the balance i owe, i'm sure it should be more, do i accept or fight on?
thanks in advance x

Ask yourself one simple question. Would MBNA offer you anything if they wern't in the wrong? The mere fact they have offered anything means they have admitted defeat and are trying to limit the cost. If I were you I'd turn their offer down flat.

udydudy

ICan'tStandIt wrote: »

I really don't know how I feel about such cases.

One the one hand, she's obviously not disputing that she owes the balance (if you minus the PPI premiums), so I think that letting her off the whole lot is very unfair against those of us that play that game and are paying off our debts.

Totally agree with you about the writing off the whole balance!!! thats not on. but then MBNA did not find the credit agreement so its their fault as well.

Lynne Thorius is an adult and not a child and however "strongly recommended" the PPI was, she still had the option not to take it out. It would have been billed along with everything else on each and every MONTHLY statement received, so she had plenty of chances to query it or cancel it.

I do not agree with this one... I have always cancelled PPI since the last 7 years but have had a colleague who has always bought PPI. Once I went with her to Natwest (Wembley branch) after having advised her that her working visa conditions made PPI unclaimable. especially as the PPI stated that she should register with the Job Centre in a certain period after losing her job. Work permit regulations then meant, that if she were to lose her job she had to leave the country in 30 days and she could not register with the job centre as her visa restrictions meant she could not work for another employer!!. So they misled her into thinking she could actually bend the rules and claim.

Still knowing this the branch manager advised her that she could register with the job centre in those 30 days to claim her PPI!!!.

Just like mortgage companies pushed people into taking money against their equity to decorate houses or take holidays. I myself have been asked by Abbey to do that 2 years back and I did not but now 2 years on they refuse to give me a re-mortgage!!not that I care. But if I had taken it then I would be in negative equity!!
The banks mis-sold everything so my sympathies do not lie with them at all.. Nor does it lie with people who spent whatever they earned and more..

I guess that how most banks worked then thats why we have the credit crisis. Everybody ignored reality!! and this is reality check times!!!:rotfl:

taktikback

pixwix wrote: »

Congratulations to this lady, whatever the implications for the rest of us. I had the misfortune to deal with MBNA some years ago. I'll never do business with them again. When things went right, they were all light and kindness. When problems arose (mostly caused by MBNA themselves) they became little better than predatory.

Few financial institutions are exactly moral or ethical these days, but MBNA left a VERY bad taste in my mouth - I was left with an impression of an organisation where the lack of ethics was a matter of cynical policy, not individual employee failure.

I hope this judgment opens the gates to a whole lot more trouble for them - I can think of few firms that deserve it more.

100% agree with you. MBNA are cynical and predatory, and frankly I don't care if this lady has achieved a write off that she didn't fully deserve. It's important that as many people do as much damage as possible to this company. The higher their profile in the media the better...

..they hide behind legitimate brand names like virgin and partner with national institutions like the national trust. They are a cancer that needs to be exposed and cut out...

If there was a fund that I could contribute to that was dedicated to undermining their business, I would do so on principle.

I will be using their messaging service to congratulate them on their loss...:T

noah271007

I take it MBNA will at the very least defaulted her, making her more difficult to obtain further credit in the next 6 years?! Or has the judge in question ordered this to be removed from CRA's files after judgement?

Paul_Herring

taktikback wrote: »

100% agree with you. MBNA are cynical and predatory, and frankly I don't care if this lady has achieved a write off that she didn't fully deserve. It's important that as many people do as much damage as possible to this company. The higher their profile in the media the better...

I have to disagree, they were most helpful in giving me reasonable limits when I was stoozing (Beside the point I know )

oscar52

noah271007 wrote: »

I take it MBNA will at the very least defaulted her, making her more difficult to obtain further credit in the next 6 years?! Or has the judge in question ordered this to be removed from CRA's files after judgement?

An interesting point, and one I am sure will come out sooner or later.

belle60

Thanks all for the advise i'll be right on it!

ILW

taktikback wrote: »

100% agree with you. MBNA are cynical and predatory, and frankly I don't care if this lady has achieved a write off that she didn't fully deserve. It's important that as many people do as much damage as possible to this company. The higher their profile in the media the better...

..they hide behind legitimate brand names like virgin and partner with national institutions like the national trust. They are a cancer that needs to be exposed and cut out...

If there was a fund that I could contribute to that was dedicated to undermining their business, I would do so on principle.

I will be using their messaging service to congratulate them on their loss...:T

Can't pay your bills then?