update

di3004

deeb604 wrote: »

Hi I have both, where do I get a FOS complaint form and should I ring the FOS first, its very upsetting! Thank you

Hiya

Yes I bet it is very upsetting, being told they are refunding you then changing their minds.
You can ring the FOS for a complaints form, or you can download and print one from their website......
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumer/complaints.htm

What I would do in your case is give the FOS a ring and explain your situation you have here, they may deal with your complaint over the phone, and I would also be inclined to let the bank know what you've done as well.
Remember to enclose copies of any written correspondence on both your offer and the most recent letter you received.

Good luck.

deeb604

my letter from funding corp on 31st Aug tells me i applied for the loan on 9 october 2002 over the phone bla bla then it says

'whilst we feel that the policy was sold in your interest we are prepared to make the following offer

• A full refund of all the premiums paid by you including interest totalling £2781.56.

I would be grateful if you could sign the below form confirming you accept this offer in full and final settlement against all parties of your complaint'
I sent reply in acceptance 2nd Sept , they received it 3rd Sept.

Then todays letter states
'Further to our previous correspondance dated 31st August, we have taken a further review of your complaint.
You entered into the credit agreement on 9 October 2002. The basis of your claim you were missold PPI on or around the same date. As more than 6 years have passed since the date of the alleged misselling of the PPI, your claim is staute barred pursuant to section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980.
We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause but advise the offer made on 31st August has been withdrawn.
Due to the date you were missold PPI we also do not believe that your complaint falls under the jusristiction of the Financial ombudsman service'


CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS????

di3004

deeb604 wrote: »

my letter from funding corp on 31st Aug tells me i applied for the loan on 9 october 2002 over the phone bla bla then it says




'whilst we feel that the policy was sold in your interest we are prepared to make the following offer

• A full refund of all the premiums paid by you including interest totalling £2781.56.

I would be grateful if you could sign the below form confirming you accept this offer in full and final settlement against all parties of your complaint'
I sent reply in acceptance 2nd Sept , they received it 3rd Sept.

Then todays letter states
'Further to our previous correspondance dated 31st August, we have taken a further review of your complaint.
You entered into the credit agreement on 9 October 2002. The basis of your claim you were missold PPI on or around the same date. As more than 6 years have passed since the date of the alleged misselling of the PPI, your claim is staute barred pursuant to section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980.
We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause but advise the offer made on 31st August has been withdrawn.
Due to the date you were missold PPI we also do not believe that your complaint falls under the jusristiction of the Financial ombudsman service'


CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS????

Arh right, so they are trying to say then its not covered by the FSA so therefore your unable to take this complaint to the FOS, as they are not able to deal with complaints not covered/under jurisdiction.

I would still contact the FOS anyway, because they made the offer, you accepted and they should therefore pay out.

Have you any paperwork that may give any idea if these were regulated by maybe GISC before the FSA taken over these in Jan 2005?

Are these the company?

Name & Registered Office:
THE FUNDING CORPORATION LIMITED
I M HOUSE
SOUTH DRIVE
COLESHILL
WEST MIDLANDS
B46 1DF
Company No. 04055624

Consumerist

deeb604 wrote: »

I had an offer from funding corp on a loan i took out in 2002 and paid off in Nov 2004. I had the offer of £2786 on 31st August and have been waiting for the cheque. I got home tonight and have had a letter withdrawing the offer and stating as the loan was taken out n 2002 this is out of the statute of limitations. Can they do this?? Help??

Banks are required to keep financial records for at least six years. If you paid off your loan in Nov 2004 then the six years will not have expired until November this year. Accodingly, they should still have the records and, indeed, must have had them in order to calculate your offer.

In any event, the only barrier to claims older than six years is that records may not still be held by the bank but if the claimant has adequate records, for example. a copy of the agreement then a claim can succeed.

Did they send you a breakdown of the offer?

If so, that constitutes good evidence that the bank still has the records. Send a copy of that breakdown with your complaint to the FOS. I suspect they will take a pretty dim view of what has happened to you and probably award you compensation for the inconvenience you have been put to.

Good luck with your claim. It looks very likely you have a good case.

deeb604

Consumerist wrote: »

Banks are required to keep financial records for at least six years. If you paid off your loan in Nov 2004 then the six years will not have expired until November this year. Accodingly, they should still have the records and, indeed, must have had them in order to calculate your offer.

In any event, the only barrier to claims older than six years is that records may not still be held by the bank but if the claimant has adequate records, for example. a copy of the agreement then a claim can succeed.

Did they send you a breakdown of the offer?

If so, that constitutes good evidence that the bank still has the records. Send a copy of that breakdown with your complaint to the FOS. I suspect they will take a pretty dim view of what has happened to you and probably award you compensation for the inconvenience you have been put to.

Good luck with your claim. It looks very likely you have a good case.

They sent me the agreement showing the PPI they then calculated that plus interest in there offer.

robbedofmymoney

i think the bank is trying it on and being a bit naughty, i would definatley go to the FOS, but first of all write to the lender and give them a further 14 days to reconsider, pointing out that they must have the information as they have confirmed this within their offer dated XXXXXXX, and that the FOS and ICO would not look too kindly at their recent actions.

then go to the FOS,
it;s worht one more try giving them 14 days as the fos could take an further 6-9 months

di3004

I agree with the others here.
The best of luck and ask for more help when required too.;)X

marshallka

If you only just became aware of the misselling then you can still make a complaint. The FOS also look at it like in section 32 limitations act.

Fraud, concealment and mistake

32 Postponement of limitation period in case of fraud, concealment or mistake

(1) Subject to [F1subsection (3)][F1subsections (3) and (4A)] below, where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either—
(a)the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or
(b)any fact relevant to the plaintiff’s right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or
(c)the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;
the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it.
References in this subsection to the defendant include references to the defendant’s agent and to any person through whom the defendant claims and his agent.
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty.
(3)Nothing in this section shall enable any action—
(a)to recover, or recover the value of, any property; or
(b)to enforce any charge against, or set aside any transaction affecting, any property;
to be brought against the purchaser of the property or any person claiming through him in any case where the property has been purchased for valuable consideration by an innocent third party since the fraud or concealment or (as the case may be) the transaction in which the mistake was made took place.

Basically 6 years from when you became aware. 3 years from when you should have reasonably been aware. We mostly only just became aware cause of media coverage in this.

Consumerist

There has been a report on another thead that the banks are collectively considering whether to ask for a judicial review of the FSAs requirement on banks to refund mis-sold PPI retrospectively. If they do, it is possible there will be a freeze imposed by the courts in the same way as happened to bank charges.

If more cases like this begin to emerge in the near future, it is possible the banks know it is coming and want to avoid pay-outs before the matter has been through the courts.

Just a thought.

robbedofmymoney

Consumerist wrote: »

There has been a report on another thead that the banks are collectively considering whether to ask for a judicial review of the FSAs requirement on banks to refund mis-sold PPI retrospectively. If they do, it is possible there will be a freeze imposed by the courts in the same way as happened to bank charges.

If more cases like this begin to emerge in the near future, it is possible the banks know it is coming and want to avoid pay-outs before the matter has been through the courts.

Just a thought.

completely agree that this is their strategy to delay things, however this does not give them the right to lie outright which it appears they are doing in this case.

if it does go for juditial review its only about the processes involved with looking into the miss-sale and not the fact that miss-selling took place, so in this instance they could be liable for more interest on the claims currently being reviewed.