update

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

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.

Great find Marshallka.:T:T

marshallka

robbedofmymoney wrote: »

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.

Its makes you wonder about why there is such a delay at FOS too. It used to be 6 months wait for a claim (or thereabouts) and now its more like 18 months.

Consumerist

I think it's just a question of sheer volume with both the banks and the FOS. More and more people are becomming aware of the PPI scandal from media coverage so I think it's just an inevitable consequence of that.

marshallka

Consumerist wrote: »

I think it's just a question of sheer volume with both the banks and the FOS. More and more people are becomming aware of the PPI scandal from media coverage so I think it's just an inevitable consequence of that.

Would you say that PPI complaints already at FOS would go on hold? Is this what could happen?

Consumerist

It's certainly a possibility. I would think the position of the FOS would be rather shaky in those circumstances. I'm not, however, familiar with legal procedures so perhaps a lawyer might come along to give an opinion.

deeb604

Hi all just to let you know, the FOS, FSA, OFT and The Funding corporation all do not want to know about pursuing this further, gotta just let it drop!!!

di3004

deeb604 wrote: »

Hi all just to let you know, the FOS, FSA, OFT and The Funding corporation all do not want to know about pursuing this further, gotta just let it drop!!!

OMG, really?

So what exactly did the FOS say if you don't mind me asking?

deeb604

di3004 wrote: »

OMG, really?

So what exactly did the FOS say if you don't mind me asking?

Not under juristiction in 2002 when agreement was first taken out then staute barred, could goto court as loan was settled in 2004. Its shocking, could be called human error!!!

di3004

deeb604 wrote: »

Not under juristiction in 2002 when agreement was first taken out then staute barred, could goto court as loan was settled in 2004.

I am so sorry to here this news, I really am, especially after they already gave you an offer and you accepted!!!

I am sure someone on here will have some good advice on where to take this, as court is another option, remember as you know though to keep all your letters you received for evidence, this should in my opinion back you up.

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/claims/index.htm

I have never gone that direction myself, but I'm sure someone will be able to guide you on this, or you could contact your local CAB and take it from there if you want to.;)

marshallka

deeb604 wrote: »

Hi all just to let you know, the FOS, FSA, OFT and The Funding corporation all do not want to know about pursuing this further, gotta just let it drop!!!

Is that about the offer that was later withdrawn?