Offer from Clydesdale Bank

KingofKings

I have had a letter from FOS stating that my claim with Clydesdale back has been upheld and as a goodwill gesture will repay all interest paid on PPI. Does this mean they are only going to pay the interest or will I receive payment for mis-sold PPI. Anybody else have similiar dealings with Clydesdale Bank ?

marshallka

KingofKings wrote: »

I have had a letter from FOS stating that my claim with Clydesdale back has been upheld and as a goodwill gesture will repay all interest paid on PPI. Does this mean they are only going to pay the interest or will I receive payment for mis-sold PPI. Anybody else have similiar dealings with Clydesdale Bank ?

I would get back to your adjudicator and ask them to clarify it. You would normally expect a full redress for misselling (although this does say goodwill?) to be putting you back into the position as if you never had the PPI. This would be the PPI and interest you have been charged (the amount you have actually paid towards your PPI paid direct to you) and 8% statutory interest and the rest taken off your loan if not yet settled. Often a new agreement is then drawn up to reflect this.

KingofKings

Thanks marshallka for replying. My letter states :- Clydesdale Bank has now told me that itis prepared to uphold your complaint and as a gesture of goodwill, it will refund the interest paid by you on the PPI premium to date, on an ex-gratia basis which will effectively convert the single premium policy into a monthly premium. The letter then goes on to state that the policy is still in place but I can cancel by writing to Clydesdale Bank and I should bear in mind that the offer was made before the adjudicator had completed her investigations. Have you or anybody heard of anything similar to this ?

marshallka

KingofKings wrote: »

Thanks marshallka for replying. My letter states :- Clydesdale Bank has now told me that itis prepared to uphold your complaint and as a gesture of goodwill, it will refund the interest paid by you on the PPI premium to date, on an ex-gratia basis which will effectively convert the single premium policy into a monthly premium. The letter then goes on to state that the policy is still in place but I can cancel by writing to Clydesdale Bank and I should bear in mind that the offer was made before the adjudicator had completed her investigations. Have you or anybody heard of anything similar to this ?

If you think or want your premium back and to be put back into the position as if you never had the PPI then you can still ask for it to be adjudicated now. What they are meaning (this is all following the new proposals by the FSA by the looks of it here) is that you are still going to be insured BUT it will be a monthly premium payable and cancellable and no interest. Firms now are being asked when people make complaints "whether the consumer would have likely bought a policy anyway??". Seems something similar in the above statement but you need to decide if you still want insurance with them or ever did in the firstplace really. You can also shop around for yourself. If you decide you really did not then go for the whole lot back via the adjudicator or at least ask the adjudicators advice as you do not fully understand the redress offer in goodwill.

KingofKings

marshallka the part I don't understand is that they have upheld my complaint which to me suggets I was mis-sold the policy but I am only going to receive the interest I have paid on the policy. There is a settlement form to be returned to the adjudicator but there are no figures quoted (which I find strange) How do they expect me to make a decision if I don't know what is on offer. I could calculate this myself but it might not be what they calculate and then where would I be.The reason I posted originally was to see if this is normal or if anybody else had similar experiences. Thanks for taking time to reply as I am new to this forum and still trying to find my way about.

marshallka

KingofKings wrote: »

marshallka the part I don't understand is that they have upheld my complaint which to me suggets I was mis-sold the policy but I am only going to receive the interest I have paid on the policy. There is a settlement form to be returned to the adjudicator but there are no figures quoted (which I find strange) How do they expect me to make a decision if I don't know what is on offer. I could calculate this myself but it might not be what they calculate and then where would I be.The reason I posted originally was to see if this is normal or if anybody else had similar experiences. Thanks for taking time to reply as I am new to this forum and still trying to find my way about.

I would ring the adjudicator and speak to him/her and tell them that your original complaint still stands in that you were missold and their normal redress for being missold is to be put back into the position as if you nver had the PPI. The offer seems not to do that and is "goodwill". I would then ask for it to be adjudicated as this was not what you had in mind. They will then look into the complaint and decide for you. I have never seen an offer like this before BUT that is not saying there are not going to be lots like it in future. Good luck

marshallka

KingofKings, this is from the new proposals by the FSA on redress and it may be something like this that Clydesdale are using

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).

KingofKings

Thanks marsallka I will phone the adjudicator

marshallka

KingofKings wrote: »

Thanks marsallka I will phone the adjudicator

You're welcome. Let us know how you go on.