ppi- go for misselling or make claim or both?

jessieja

Mum's been made redundant. She has a multitude of debts, 2 of which have ppi. (capital one and natwest)

Wondering whether she should try and claim 12 months payments using the ppi, and then go for misselling, if this is possible, or whether to go for misselling only- and can you do this after the loan/card is paid off? (dad may pay off for her)

Mum has previously had a redundancy and approached natwest to make a claim on the ppi, but was fobbed off.

which way's best to go?

di3004

jessieja wrote: »

Mum's been made redundant. She has a multitude of debts, 2 of which have ppi. (capital one and natwest)

Wondering whether she should try and claim 12 months payments using the ppi, and then go for misselling, if this is possible, or whether to go for misselling only- and can you do this after the loan/card is paid off? (dad may pay off for her)

Mum has previously had a redundancy and approached natwest to make a claim on the ppi, but was fobbed off.

which way's best to go?

Hi there
If your mum goes for the mis selling if mis sold for any reason and if successful, this should help to at least to reduce the debt, or if enough it may pay it all off, depending on what is owing.

Wait for other opinions on this if you want to.

More info on the guidelines of reclaiming here:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-loan-insurance

However, if your mum was made redundant and she was eligible for this cover, she should be successful on making a claim, this will be made monthly.
Ask for help if required, good luck.;)

dunstonh

Mum has previously had a redundancy and approached natwest to make a claim on the ppi, but was fobbed off.

Strange as its not the bank that makes the decision to pay out or not. It is the insurance company.

jessieja

She is incredibly incompetent! She went to see the 'nice man' at natwest and he said she didnt have a claim. This is the same 'nice man' who has 'forgotten to look for, but will send them' the ppi terms and conditions..... over 4 weeks ago.

If she makes a straight forward claim on the policy due to redundancy, I presume she cant at a later date, ie after the 12 months of payouts, claim it was missold?

She's paid £40 per month for 3 years; 7 years left to run, but looking into raising capital to pay off whole amount owing.

My thinking is to get the redundancy claim in on the ppi, get loan paid for 12 months (if refuse, go for misselling immediately) and then pay off outstanding amount, which by then will be less than current amount owing. But if a misselling claim could go in after the 12 months, that's a bonus. (although seems unethical!)

dunstonh

If she makes a straight forward claim on the policy due to redundancy, I presume she cant at a later date, ie after the 12 months of payouts, claim it was missold?

Yes. However, the FSA have just published guidelines on these cases where claims on the policy have been made and the value of the claim will be taken into account. Many believe it is unethical to claim on the policy and claim mis-sale. However, the rules do allow it.

marshallka

dunstonh wrote: »

Yes. However, the FSA have just published guidelines on these cases where claims on the policy have been made and the value of the claim will be taken into account. Many believe it is unethical to claim on the policy and claim mis-sale. However, the rules do allow it.

Yes, its whereby you can be missold if it was a single premium cause not always the cheapest option and by then you cannot go and buy a stand alone policy. Some people required insurance but their only option was the one given to them by the banks etc. (sometimes sold compulsory).

Still hard to determine if you actually have claimed on it though... I bet these new guidelines are a right pain to the firms....

PaulinWeston

dunstonh wrote: »

Yes. However, the FSA have just published guidelines on these cases where claims on the policy have been made and the value of the claim will be taken into account. Many believe it is unethical to claim on the policy and claim mis-sale. However, the rules do allow it.

Wow Dunstonh – that really surprises me (I don’t doubt the accuracy of your post as you are very erudite on these matters) – for a layman like me it just seems weird that you can do this...

Hypothetically (because I’m sure it would never happen) – what would the FSA’s reaction be someone made a claim on a policy and the insurance company said: “sorry – we can’t pay out because we don’t think that you were given all the information required when you took out the policy – so it would be ‘unfair’ to honour a policy that was mis-sold to you”?

I don’t envy you IFA types.... it seems that everything is ‘stacked’ against you... while I’m all in favour of the “Treating Customers Fairly” principle, I don’t necessarily hold with the “Let the customers take the whatsit” attitude..

dunstonh

Wow Dunstonh – that really surprises me (I don’t doubt the accuracy of your post as you are very erudite on these matters) – for a layman like me it just seems weird that you can do this...

I think its on the basis that the ends dont justify the means. However, if it was set up correctly at the start (i.e. monthly premiums) then the chances of a complaint being successful following a claim are fairly remote. As Marshallka says, it would really only be on a single premium basis where you would expect it to work in the consumer's favour.

Hypothetically (because I’m sure it would never happen) – what would the FSA’s reaction be someone made a claim on a policy and the insurance company said: “sorry – we can’t pay out because we don’t think that you were given all the information required when you took out the policy – so it would be ‘unfair’ to honour a policy that was mis-sold to you”?

Company would be fined big time by the FSA. The FSA is increasingly consumer friendly to the point where its almost getting daft.

I don’t envy you IFA types.... it seems that everything is ‘stacked’ against you... while I’m all in favour of the “Treating Customers Fairly” principle, I don’t necessarily hold with the “Let the customers take the whatsit” attitude..

I know this is a consumer site but the amount of backside protecting you have to do now is more than it ever has been. The complaints handlers give us feedback and they reckon now that at least 1 in 3 complaints is a try it on. Luckily, if you have done nothing wrong then you generally have nothing to fear but you can do things in good faith and find years later someone sticks a complaint in because a claims company has told them it was a mis-sale despite the claims company not having a clue.

PaulinWeston

dunstonh wrote: »

but the amount of backside protecting you have to do now is more than it ever has been.

It's a sign of the times I guess.... I'm a 'former' management consultant and we always used to put a "CYA" clause into each and every contract ....
[CYA = cover your a**e !!!!!]

finatra26

jessieja - why does your mother think the policy was mis-sold?