MSE News: Banks put PPI claims on hold in defiance of regulator

marshallka

debt55 wrote: »

yes that makes sense.

i think i misinterpreted what i was told.

but nonetheless, the point remains solid... there are no stays, and even more so... no stay has been applied for.

so the courts are free to be used if you wish to try and expediate claims.

although the FOS are putting more staff to work, so that could reduce the currnet 12-18 month waiting times.

I don't think it is quite as long a wait now TBH, I sent a complaint in in June and its with an adjudicator now. The shortest time out of my 3 but the firm is not part of the JR.... maybe that is why cause i nearly died at the time scale!!!

tiggrae

debt55 wrote: »

I have taken the time to speak to quite a few big fish in the world of PPI litigation... i pretended to be you, lol, or any other CMC owner, gave them feel that i was processing thousands of ppi cases every month and what could we do now with the JR pending...

they are VERY bullish, you see, no DJ could hold/adjourn any cases as the JR is all based on regualtory issues NOT the law of the land!

there is no point of law that is actually being argued by the BBA

and with the backing of the FSA/FOS.. and lol the BBA.. who clearly state not to hold any unrelated cases...

they do not have a leg to stand on.

the sol i spoke to is issuing only 5% of claims, as the rest are being settled, post JR!!!!

I'd be wary of starting County Court claims for any claim potentially affected by the JR, it's the othersides solicitors who would put an Application (N244) to have the claim 'Stayed' pending the outcome of the JR, you'de have to do some fancy legal footwork to get around their arguement and then it would be down to the District Judge to decide.

But you would only be able to take mis selling claims which took place in 2004 otherwise the 6 year rule in the statute of limitations would apply and the otherside would request the claim be 'struck out'.

tiggrae

TheBigDog wrote: »

I've had hold letters from MBNA (post 2005), RBS, Barclays (post 2005) and from HSBC.

I was particulary annoyed at the Barclays one, because it was taken in branch in 2007 - pre existing conditions and self employed - I've also got the SDN, which doesn't mention any of this, so I think I'm on solid ground. My initial thought was to speak to the client and stick a N1 through their door, but I'm holding on to it for the time being and let the FSA know they've held it. On top of everything else that I've posted about a CMC litigating cases, I'm very, very wary of them defending on the basis of a JR - I don't think that a Deputy District Judge would want to make a call knowing there's action in the High Court relating to this and I could easily see him or her adjourning until afterwards.

I'd love a time machine to go forward a fortnight, because I think the pictures going to be a bit clearer by then.

TBD.

Of the 5 put on hold were they post or pre 2005 and where they loans or credit cards or both.

Also, interesting I had one settled yesterday from Beneficial (part of HFC) but it was for a credit card taken out in 2003, I just can't way up what the thinking is but I'm challenging every one with a request as to how it fits in with the Judicial Review

tiggrae

marshallka wrote: »

They will have some sort of complaints department left and staff dealing things I would think. If they close down then its the FSCS isn't it?

Black Horse are a part of Lloyds so I don't think it'll be a case of the FSCS

tiggrae

marshallka wrote: »

Translate without abbreviations


Me and Bill-k still developing PPI spread sheets - have you got any extra information on sums or your spread sheets to send me - or do you pinch ours off Legal Beagles and Penalty Action group...

again still confused - spreadsheets / sums for what -? Remember guys I've not been on here for ages so not up on the lastest things on here

Turboman

tiggrae wrote: »

again still confused - spreadsheets / sums for what -? Remember guys I've not been on here for ages so not up on the lastest things on here

Hi Tigrae

Presumably you have a manual that interprets the claims according to the FOS Guidelines & later the new Policy Document

With about 9 different variations of Settled Loans with mid loan PPi refund & various Settlement Methods & last minute PPI Refunds also --neccessitating a rolling changing Apportionment Factor %(ie PPI Amnt/Total Loan & PPI Loan) which only works for the simplest of cases)

This can only be done with proper mathematical spreadshhets--do you have either a Manual Or Complex Spreadsheets?

I only know you though Marshy of course a year ago-but presume you are a CMC ???

And I know for certain that a few pinch my & Bill's work from our other 2 sites--cos we are open--Marshy now joining our Sums Club btw

Turbo

steveh31

FSA to contest BBA judicial review of PPI

12:59 09/11/2010
[Go Back]

StockMarketWire.com - The Financial Services Authority is to go head-to-head with the British Bankers Association (BBA) and contest the judicial review of new payment protection insurance (PPI) complaints handling measures.

The BBA has asked for the judicial review as it says that the FSA is effectively creating a precedent which permits it to apply new rules to previous sales – even where those sales were regulated by other FSA rules.

The FSA has countered that in the last five years there have been more than a million complaints made to firms about PPI. In 2009/2010 alone, customers referred 49,196 complaints to the Ombudsman which then upheld nine out of ten in the complainant’s favour.

It says that it strongly believes that the package of new complaint handling measures outlined in policy statement 10/12 is a sensible and fair solution for consumers and the industry alike.

steveh31

Onus is on 'entire industry' over PPI, says FSA
08 November 2010 at 19:30

The entire insurance industry must take responsibility for treating customers fairly, such as in the recent payment protection insurance scandal, it has been claimed.
Speaking to an audience at a Marketforce and Institute of Economic Affair conference, Ken Hogg, director for the insurance sector at the Financial Services Authority (FSA), acknowledged that many in the sector will feel that they are not to blame for problems with PPI.
"We understand that depending where you are in the value chain you may feel the responsibility for the PPI issues lies elsewhere," he said.
Adding: "However, the onus is on the entire industry to ensure it treats all customers fairly."
The FSA is currently pursuing the implementation of new regulations over how banks compensate customers who became victims of the widespread mis-selling of PPI packages.
However, the British Bankers' Association recently brought a judicial review of whether the FSA can apply the new standards to old sales of PPI.
"Although there is a judicial review of our PPI complaints handling measures, we strongly believe the package of measures we have outlined is a sensible and fair solution for consumers and the industry alike, and we are vigorously contesting the judicial review," Mr Hogg told the conference.

TheBigDog

tiggrae wrote: »

Of the 5 put on hold were they post or pre 2005 and where they loans or credit cards or both.

Also, interesting I had one settled yesterday from Beneficial (part of HFC) but it was for a credit card taken out in 2003, I just can't way up what the thinking is but I'm challenging every one with a request as to how it fits in with the Judicial Review

I've seen 2 hold letters from MBNA post 2005 for credit cards and I've had 1 post 2005 for Barclays on a loan taken in branch. All the others were lump sum loans pre 2005.

Regards,

TBD.

debt55

Had another very swift settlement today for a Lloyds loan taken out in 2005, 15k loan 3.4k ppi.

I completed the letter, and my friend sent it off approx 3 weeks ago.

100% upheld with 8% stat paid.