MSE News: FSA to re-open 185,000 rejected debt insurance claims

woodymeg

marshallka wrote: »

You stand a good chance as both were since regulations.;)

thanks again, also am going to claim against citifinancial back to 2001 as have all paperwork, they again knew how desperate we were as couldnt get credit anywhere else, and again paid premiums off, what are they like for paying out not seen much about them really x

di3004

woodymeg wrote: »

thanks again, also am going to claim against citifinancial back to 2001 as have all paperwork, they again knew how desperate we were as couldnt get credit anywhere else, and again paid premiums off, what are they like for paying out not seen much about them really x

Hi there

Good luck with your claims and if you get the chance check on the above Success thread, hopefully these will show some posts and success in regards of that bank.;)

marshallka

Just read this from the Independent
Thousands of borrowers are in line for compensation of hundreds of pounds each after the financial regulator ordered banks to re-open 185,000 complaints about redundancy and illness insurance.
Losing patience with routine mis-selling of payment protection insurance (PPI), the Financial Services Authority announced yesterday that all complaints from personal loan customers since July 2007 about single premium PPI would have to be looked at afresh, alongside stronger rules regulating current sales.

Then the reading of it from Reuters here
Companies accounting for 40 percent of PPI contracts sold directly to borrowers alongside unsecured personal loans have agreed to screen all such sales since July 2007 for evidence of mis-selling, and compensate affected customers, the Financial Services Authority said.

Then from the Times here
Yesterday, the FSA said that it had begun a review of the sale of PPI on secured loans, including mortgages, and credit cards. Companies that have been most active in the sale of single-premium PPI alongside personal loans have been asked to review all sales made since July 1 2007. Consumer groups have urged tough action against companies found to be at fault.


Now again, does this read meaning all complaints "made" since July 2007 OR all complaints for loans since July 2007.....Looks now to me that the only ones being actually reviewed by the firms are loans taken out SINCE JULY 2007 now.I wonder why only these dates??? What happened in July 2007 I wonder??? I know from APril 2007 FOS was allowed to look into all consumer credit complaints but only for agreements made since that date and also the unfair relationships thing in the CCA since APril, 2007 but why July, 2007??
Information on "Unfair relationships here"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/moneybox/6555695.stm

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:x_T2LwVJrUIJ:www.regulatorybreach.com/documents/UnfairnessFOSandCCA.doc+unfair+relationships+test&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk





What about complaints about loans etc taken out prior to July 2007???? This is still not right here.

Is there anywhere where we can get clarity on these new rules? The main one is what about "goodwill gestures"????

Still do not know why they have picked July 2007 for the looking back at complaints but also found this on the FSA website
The firms reviewing face-to-face Single Premium Unsecured Personal Loan PPI sales represent more than 40% of gross written premiums in that sector. They have agreed to review past sales of these made since 1 July 2007. If material detriment is found, firms will review all such sales made since January 2005. The FSA has agreed the format and key messages of the communication to be sent to customers in this exercise, namely:

• The FSA has identified specific market problems with the selling of PPI;
• on reviewing these problems as described in the letter, if the customer thinks they may be affected they should contact the firm;
• depending on what is found, the customer may be entitled to redress; and
• responding to the letter will not have a negative impact on the customers’ loan or their ability to obtain a loan in the future.

jdx

This is a relief. Thank u.:)

quercus56

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.

I issued two complaints to MBNA over PPI using the template letters. I reached the Ombudsman stage. As my credit cards were issued way back in the 90s the Ombudsman concluded they could not act as MBNA were not regulated by whoever at the time of issue.

Last week I received two letters from MBNA stating they had been told to review their original decision, the result, they were crediting my two accounts with a total of just over £5k. This 'refund' has in effect given me a zero balance on both cards and saved me nearly £250 p/m in minimum payments. Result :j

di3004

quercus56 wrote: »

I issued two complaints to MBNA over PPI using the template letters. I reached the Ombudsman stage. As my credit cards were issued way back in the 90s the Ombudsman concluded they could not act as MBNA were not regulated by whoever at the time of issue.

Last week I received two letters from MBNA stating they had been told to review their original decision, the result, they were crediting my two accounts with a total of just over £5k. This 'refund' has in effect given me a zero balance on both cards and saved me nearly £250 p/m in minimum payments. Result :j

Wow, well done and Congratulations, this will give hope to many others, fantastic.
:beer::T:beer::j:j

pinknico

quercus56 wrote: »

I issued two complaints to MBNA over PPI using the template letters. I reached the Ombudsman stage. As my credit cards were issued way back in the 90s the Ombudsman concluded they could not act as MBNA were not regulated by whoever at the time of issue.

Last week I received two letters from MBNA stating they had been told to review their original decision, the result, they were crediting my two accounts with a total of just over £5k. This 'refund' has in effect given me a zero balance on both cards and saved me nearly £250 p/m in minimum payments. Result :j

brilliant cant wait for Marshallka to read this! Your complaints were not even covered by the FOS and they still had to review it!

di3004

After what Marshallka have been through for more than a year, it would be fantastic if this would be the case for her, its been an agonising one for Marshallka and it would make her day "and ours" if they would just pay out without her having to wait and to go through all the agro again.

I am praying now this will be the case for Marshallka and they will award her big time for this one.:beer:

marshallka

pinknico wrote: »

brilliant cant wait for Marshallka to read this! Your complaints were not even covered by the FOS and they still had to review it!

Haven't read it yet but thanks..... I take it its very exciting...:eek:

di3004

Then maybe it will give me more hope on my one lol.:D
Fingers crossed for us all in this situation. X