Santander - help

goaliesmum

Di thanks very much for the useful reply. I have read on a bit and see that Santander have really dug their heels in:mad:

I am going to ring the claim handler tomorrow, let her know I am going to FOS and FLA and see what the position is. FLA do seem worse than useless though.

It makes you mad that just because they weren't governed they can ride roughshod over people.

I will keep pushing on this.


Glad to hear you have some success lately :beer:

di3004

goaliesmum wrote: »

Di thanks very much for the useful reply. I have read on a bit and see that Santander have really dug their heels in:mad:

I am going to ring the claim handler tomorrow, let her know I am going to FOS and FLA and see what the position is. FLA do seem worse than useless though.

It makes you mad that just because they weren't governed they can ride roughshod over people.

I will keep pushing on this.


Glad to hear you have some success lately :beer:

Hi hun.;)
Thank you.:A

Yes do contact them again, if all fails, then you know you can try the insurer direction.
Yes your right though, just because these businesses were not regulated as such, we get pushed to the side with fob off responses, you made a good point here.;)

Good luck, please let us know how you get on, cheers.

Di
X

magpiecottage

Without knowing the full details of the case, the GISC rules were such that insurers subscribing to it undertook not to accept business from intermediaries who did not subscribe and vice versa.

This means that if GE did not subscribe but the insurer did, you may find you could claim against the insurer because IT had breached GISC rules by accepting your business from a source that it knew did not provide GISC protection.

I think you might have some success with FOS if you could show that.

goaliesmum

magpiecottage wrote: »

Without knowing the full details of the case, the GISC rules were such that insurers subscribing to it undertook not to accept business from intermediaries who did not subscribe and vice versa.

This means that if GE did not subscribe but the insurer did, you may find you could claim against the insurer because IT had breached GISC rules by accepting your business from a source that it knew did not provide GISC protection.

I think you might have some success with FOS if you could show that.

Magpiecottage thankyou, that is an excellent bit of info and I appreciate the explanation.

Think the insurers were Financial Insurance Co Ltd part of Genworth so will do some research tomorrow re GISC.:cool:

Thanks again, I am sure others will also find it helpful :beer:

di3004

goaliesmum wrote: »

Magpiecottage thankyou, that is an excellent bit of info and I appreciate the explanation.

Think the insurers were Financial Insurance Co Ltd part of Genworth so will do some research tomorrow re GISC.:cool:

Thanks again, I am sure others will also find it helpful :beer:

Hi there

I assumed all insurers were covered by these.

I would write to them like you would your broker, they may possibly come back with a letter and say they are not responsible, but do not worry, I received a letter like this and the FOS have confirmed by letter that they are now waiting to pass this on to an adjudicator, so there we go.

Its another direction for you to try to get your money back, good luck hun.:beer:

goaliesmum

Morning everyone

Have spoken with FOS and looks like The First Personal Bank plc/G E Capital/Santander were not covered by anything until 2005 so on our own here if FLA will not help.


Have written a 2nd letter, appreciate any comments, I'm not holding out any real hope with this but I will go the court route if necessary, after I do a lot of research


Dear We-are-not-bothered-because-we-were-not-regulated-cards-uk


I am writing in response to your letter dated 2 December, with regards the insurance sold with my store card. Your reference is *****.

I do not feel your letter has offered a satisfactory justification that my policy was sold fairly, reasonably and within my best interests so I request that you look into my complaint again.

Your letter states, quote "I note that you say that you were not told that the policy was optional when it was taken out in 1997 but I also note that the process that we had in place was to make clear that it was not compulsory." End quote.

I did not make any mention in my letter to you of the optional nature of the policy, could provide me with the wording from my letter that suggests this to you?

I routinely do not accept Payment Protection Insurance when taking credit for the reasons stated in my initial letter, my terms of employment give me excellent sickness and redundancy cover.

Your reasoning that I knew the policy was optional because you had processes in place to make it clear it was not compulsory is contradicted by your explanation that there was no requirement for you to record the sales process, so you have no way of knowing what took place at the time the agreement was signed.

Further to that the agreement is completed in the store assistants handwriting and only signed by me. I do not see how you can assert that the agreement was ticked by me in this case. Also I am left handed and the tick does not correspond to any mark I could make, and I make claim I was misled into accepting this payment protection insurance, with this in mind I will take this matter to court if it is necessary.

I fail to see how I could have cancelled within 30 days something I was not aware I had taken.

If I do not receive a more favorable response within 14 days I shall be taking my complaint to the Finance & Leasing Association as the next step.

Any thoughts? Thanks :T

di3004

goaliesmum wrote: »

Morning everyone

Have spoken with FOS and looks like The First Personal Bank plc/G E Capital/Santander were not covered by anything until 2005 so on our own here if FLA will not help.


Have written a 2nd letter, appreciate any comments, I'm not holding out any real hope with this but I will go the court route if necessary, after I do a lot of research


Dear We-are-not-bothered-because-we-were-not-regulated-cards-uk


I am writing in response to your letter dated 2 December, with regards the insurance sold with my store card. Your reference is *****.

I do not feel your letter has offered a satisfactory justification that my policy was sold fairly, reasonably and within my best interests so I request that you look into my complaint again.

Your letter states, quote "I note that you say that you were not told that the policy was optional when it was taken out in 1997 but I also note that the process that we had in place was to make clear that it was not compulsory." End quote.

I did not make any mention in my letter to you of the optional nature of the policy, could provide me with the wording from my letter that suggests this to you?

I routinely do not accept Payment Protection Insurance when taking credit for the reasons stated in my initial letter, my terms of employment give me excellent sickness and redundancy cover.

Your reasoning that I knew the policy was optional because you had processes in place to make it clear it was not compulsory is contradicted by your explanation that there was no requirement for you to record the sales process, so you have no way of knowing what took place at the time the agreement was signed.

Further to that the agreement is completed in the store assistants handwriting and only signed by me. I do not see how you can assert that the agreement was ticked by me in this case. Also I am left handed and the tick does not correspond to any mark I could make, and I make claim I was misled into accepting this payment protection insurance, with this in mind I will take this matter to court if it is necessary.

I fail to see how I could have cancelled within 30 days something I was not aware I had taken.

If I do not receive a more favorable response within 14 days I shall be taking my complaint to the Finance & Leasing Association as the next step.

Any thoughts? Thanks :T

Hi hun

Well its a fab letter and you seemed to have covered everything here.:T

Are any of those the actual insurer?
If not you can try to pursue through them instead if you want to.

Good luck with this letter and hope it works out for you.

And as you mentioned about the court direction it may even help your case now.
I do certainly hope so.

Fingers crossed hun and please keep us posted on this, cheers.;)