MSE News: FSA to re-open 185,000 rejected debt insurance claims 29 September 2009 at 12:37PM edited 29 September 2009 at 2:12PM in Reclaim PPI & Other Insurance 110 replies 6.6K views

MSE_Guy

This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

"The City regulator will reopen 185,000 rejected debt insurance misselling complaints as part of a crackdown to ensure firms selling cover do not unfairly dismiss consumer gripes ..."

Read the full story:
FSA to re-open 185,000 rejected debt insurance claims

di3004

Thanks for this MSE Guy.

So I assume this would mean many can re-submit their complaints then, that were originally rejected perhaps?

dunstonh

No need to resubmit. The providers will have to go back on rejected complaints and review them again. Similar has occured in the past in other areas when firms were found to "over reject" complaints. Out of the blue people would be told a review of their complaint has seen it upheld and redress payable.

pinknico

Would you expect these to be handed back from the FOS or just from among their (the companies)complaints department?

pixwix

What alarms me is how hard many firms are STILL hard-selling payment insurance and allied services. My own credit card company spent 20 minutes the other day trying to put the frighteners on me about the dire consequences of not subscribing to a whole range of insurance services - from anti-identity theft to loss protection. Not the same as payment insurance I know - but all part of the same drive to sell us financial services we either don't need or ought not to need in a properly regulated market.

di3004

dunstonh wrote: »

No need to resubmit. The providers will have to go back on rejected complaints and review them again. Similar has occured in the past in other areas when firms were found to "over reject" complaints. Out of the blue people would be told a review of their complaint has seen it upheld and redress payable.

Thanks for confirming this Dunstonh.;)

I take it though, this would not include claims prior to Jan 2005 that were not governed as such then?

Nathan_Spleen

More details on this from the FSA press release: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2009/129.shtml

marshallka

dunstonh wrote: »

No need to resubmit. The providers will have to go back on rejected complaints and review them again. Similar has occured in the past in other areas when firms were found to "over reject" complaints. Out of the blue people would be told a review of their complaint has seen it upheld and redress payable.

And do you honestly think that the firms will actually do this to everyone? What about jurisdiction issues with FOS? Are they still the same in that if a firm is not within FOS jurisdiction at the time of sales then that means that they can still reject and nothing will be done? If this is the case then we still have problems as lots are looked into purely by the date of the loans/credit etc and then rejected knowing that nothing can be done by FOS. Its such a shame.

It mentions nothing of wider jurisdictions for FOS.

marshallka

pinknico wrote: »

Would you expect these to be handed back from the FOS or just from among their (the companies)complaints department?

I would think that this would be ALL "FOS sible" complaints Pinknico. FOS has not had their jurisdictions widened so it will be all those people that do not bother to take it further (who could have done) once a firm has said "we sold it fairly"...:rolleyes:

marshallka

I bet there will be lots of temporary christmas jobs in banks etc for complaints handling now...:cool:

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I bet there will be lots of temporary christmas jobs in banks etc for complaints handling now...:cool:

lol, yeah I expect so Marshallka