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

audley16

petecorfu wrote: »

Your bang on there about alpine mr cmc!!! you have had the same feeling i had + thebigdog + debt55 and you have just joined!!

Funny that alpine a?

Pete

Do you construct your case letters yourself?

petecorfu

audley16 wrote: »

Pete

Do you construct your case letters yourself?

Is this leading to a pi$$ take? or is there any relevance to why you ask that question to this thread?

Yes to answer your question! You have to because of all the different selling (or mis-selling) scenarios.

why?

Mr_CMC

Audley, you seem to be chomping at the bit for "my view"

you hold me such high esteem already?

We hardly know each other!

Mr CMC

audley16

Mr_CMC wrote: »

Audley, you seem to be chomping at the bit for "my view"

you hold me such high esteem already?

We hardly know each other!

Mr CMC

Not really, it's just that you introduced yourself by telling us how big your company is and then promised to give us the benefit of your knowledge and expertise this morning, which has not been forthcoming yet.

Mr_CMC

petecorfu wrote: »

im useing my own slang! i call them ppi dsar's

Pay the tenner, and get a full Subject Access Request in my man, oh so much further information can be gleaned to aid the case against the lender.

Between 20-30% off ALL new business for us is from existing clients, that is very high for the industry, and for darn good reason.

We aim to provide the most quality service, at the most competitive rate in the market.

This business is a secondary business in my portfolio, my primary business is related to the Currency markets, therefore, making my "millions" from PPI Reclaiming is not the target.

My payroll is circa 55K a month, and the lenders can stick cases on hold for as long as they desire, I won't be laying off any staff, or downgrading, we are actually getting stuck in harder!

My view on this JR is simple, it is an attempt to force the closure of many CMCs who are under capitalised.

I believe they will lose in January, and appeal to the Supreme court and let this drag on until late 2011, early 2012.

They will succeed in sending under many CMCs.

However, those with the funding, will become big monsters for them to handle.

It's a game of poker.

I have heard varying views of the BBA action and the validity of it, or not as the case may be, but nobody knows for sure.

So lets just wait till the end of January 2011, and see where the land lies.

Our figures for November state only 20% of new cases put through have been fedback to us with the standard line about the BBA action etc.

Every single major lender has upheld a claim of some kind since the 8th October.

My advice is simple, carry on going, if you have deep enough pockets, this is for the CMCs.

For consumers, nothing changes, carry on sticking those questionnaires in, keep a copy, and if you get a hold letter, send the copy straight to the FOS.

The banks can only win if we stop putting claims in.

We are on for 1300 new claims submitted since 8th October.

So hello Mr Bank, if you are reading, and thank you for making my company stronger.

You see, the PPI leads we buy have dropped in value by around 70% since every other CMC stopped buying them.

Cheers
Mr CMC

Alpine_Star

That's better.

Mr_CMC wrote: »

I believe they will lose in January, and appeal to the Supreme court and let this drag on until late 2011, early 2012.

So lets just wait till the end of January 2011, and see where the land lies.

In my view it is more likely that the outcome would be some kind of compromise rather than a straight forward winner & loser as there are numerous individual issues at stake.

I think that it is unlikely that we'll be able to see how the land lies at the end of January as a written judgment will take at least a month before it is handed down for a case as complex as this.

Appeals for Administrative Court Judicial Review rulings are heard by the Court of Appeal and not the Supreme Court.

Mr_CMC

Is this not a substantive hearing?

Alpine_Star

Mr_CMC wrote: »

Is this not a substantive hearing?

We don't actually know if a substantive hearing will take place yet as it depends on the outcome of the application hearing. It is listed as rolled hearing ie an application hearing which would continue as a substantive hearing should the application be granted.

Mr_CMC

Alpine_Star wrote: »

We don't actually know if a substantive hearing will take place yet as it depends on the outcome of the application hearing. It is listed as rolled hearing ie an application hearing which would continue as a substantive hearing should the application be granted.

Thank you.

So dependant upon this, we will then know if they will appeal to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.

Alpine_Star

Mr_CMC wrote: »

Thank you.

So dependant upon this, we will then know if they will appeal to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.

No, any appeal to either the application for Judicial Review or the substantive application (the actual Judicial Review) gets heard in the Court of Appeal. But any subsequent appeal to a CoA judgment could be taken to the Supreme Court, subject to the granting of leave to appeal.