The loser is likely to appeal

debt55

LOL, the last few words of MSE Guy's article.

and here we go again.

2 years?

marshallka

debt55 wrote: »

LOL, the last few words of MSE Guy's article.

and here we go again.

2 years?

And also this one

So, where banks believe consumers are complaining about mis-selling that falls under the new FSA guidelines, the case will go on hold. But as this is so vague it could give them free rein to put most cases on hold.

Which complaints will be frozen?
The BBA and the banks stress it is impossible to give specific examples of what cases will be put on hold.
The issue centres on the fact the BBA is arguing, as part of the legal case, that its members have been required to follow FSA rules on PPI sales yet the FSA only clarified what is expected of them this year, and now expects banks to have followed those updated guidelines in the past.
The BBA says this is unfair as the regulator is applying regulation retrospectively.


This statement cannot stand for complaints about the sales of PPI with the rules that were in force either when GISC were around or since the FSA took over 14th Jan 2005. If your complaint is relating to those rules then surely they cannot dismiss the complaint?

I think eventually most people with complaints that were about sales who have a good case will get redress and IF the banks win at all, they will only win in that they should get in touch with everyone who they think may have been missold.