Egg credit card (2001) - FOS have NOT upheld my claim!

jessie15

Hi, I have just received a letter from FOS (an Adjudicator)refusing my claim for the misselling of ppi on a credit card I took out in 2001, this was an online application.

My reason for claiming was pre existing medical conditions and that I believed it was a pre-ticked box for ppi on application.
FOS say very briefly, that they think it was more than likely that Egg explained that the policy was optional and that I agreed to take it out! Egg have provided a screen shot of the ppi section that shows I was given the option by selecting yes or no, they go on to say that there is no evidence that these options were pre-filled by Egg!
They then go on to say that even though I have pre-existing medical conditions and even though I had to take time off work I never made a claim. The application form gave me access to the full policy details, making it my responsibility to check if the policy was suitable for me.

Now how does Egg providing a screen shot prove that was what I saw when I appled as I am positive it was pre-ticked (also the screen shot that Egg have provided is an upto date one as it shows that I have worked for my employer for 25 years as is correct now but in 2001 that would have been 15 years, so obviously not what I would have seen then) I really didint realise that I had taken out ppi, so how could I have then made a claim when I was off work due to several operations? And why would I check the policy if I didnt know I had it?

Now I know that the FOS have been upholding claims due to preticked boxes in 2001 as I have seen it on here, so how can they uphold some and not mine?

If anyone can help I would really appreciate their input.

src007

Hello jessie15,

I think for internet sales, for some periods, Egg pre-filled the PPI box (the consumer had to opt out) and at other times they didn't (the consumer had to tick the box).

You may have to accept that you did in fact tick for it, as it was along time ago?

However, saying this, if I were you I would still write back to the adjudicator to ask why your employment status is 10 years out? It is at least possible that a mistake has been made with the dates.

You may also want to ask for a copy of the information that Egg would have provided at the time of the sale, so you can see what it says about pre-existing conditions. If the exclusions were in tiny print on page 17, you may want to question that as well?

However the FOS have a standard approach and they must think that the exclusions to do with pre-exising medical conditions were made clear in the paperwork / internet information.

I hope this helps!

di3004

jessie15 wrote: »

Hi, I have just received a letter from FOS (an Adjudicator)refusing my claim for the misselling of ppi on a credit card I took out in 2001.

My reason for claiming was pre existing medical conditions and that I believed it was a pre-ticked box for ppi on application.
FOS say very briefly, that they think it was more than likely that Egg explained that the policy was optional and that I agreed to take it out! Egg have provided a screen shot of the ppi section that shows I was given the option by selecting yes or no, they go on to say that there is no evidence that these options were pre-filled by Egg!
They then go on to say that even though I have pre-existing medical conditions and even though I had to take time off work I never made a claim. The application form gave me access to the full policy details, making it my responsibility to check if the policy was suitable for me.

Now how does Egg providing a screen shot prove that was what I saw when I appled as I am positive it was pre-ticked (also the screen shot that Egg have provided is an upto date one as it shows that I have worked for my employer for 25 years as is correct now but in 2001 that would have been 15 years, so obviously not what I would have seen then) I really didint realise that I had taken out ppi, so how could I have then made a claim when I was off work due to several operations? And why would I check the policy if I didnt know I had it?

Now I know that the FOS have been upholding claims due to preticked boxes in 2001 as I have seen it on here, so how can they uphold some and not mine?

If anyone can help I would really appreciate their input.

Hi there

So sorry to hear this.
May I ask if they have confirmed that your case will be passed on to an ombudsman for review of your complaint?
This is normally mentioned, if not then I would contact them and tell them you want this reviewed.

The fact that the policy was worthless to you because of medical conditions have been a waste of money to you, so in this case you have been deprived of your money.

Any further information I would send to the ombudsman for review.
Was the tick crossed in ink?

I would also mention the fact that if you knew you were paying for the ppi then you would have tried making a claim, but since looking through the details you were aware you were not protected anyway because of pre existing medical conditions.

I used to think ppi was part of it to be honest and was sold it when i was only receiving my children's benefits, that was back in 2001.

Contact them tomorrow if you get the chance (if the ombudsman have not been mentioned).
Good luck.

src007

di3004 is right to let you know that you can 'appeal' the complaint to an Ombudsman, if you disagree.

There's massive queues at this stage and it's worth getting all your questions answered before moving it on because there's no point continuing a 'hopeless cause'.

As di says its worth getting any additional info to the adjudicator as well.

I would ask the ask the adjudicator questions and then when you have all the answers you can decide if you think the adjudicator's got it wrong, or whether to call it a day!

anamenottaken

jessie15 wrote: »

I really didint realise that I had taken out ppi, so how could I have then made a claim when I was off work due to several operations? And why would I check the policy if I didnt know I had it?

I think you need to work out why you didn't know you had PPI. There must have been regular payments for it.

jessie15

src007 wrote: »

Hello jessie15,

I think for internet sales, for some periods, Egg pre-filled the PPI box (the consumer had to opt out) and at other times they didn't (the consumer had to tick the box).

You may have to accept that you did in fact tick for it, as it was along time ago?

However, saying this, if I were you I would still write back to the adjudicator to ask why your employment status is 10 years out? It is at least possible that a mistake has been made with the dates.

You may also want to ask for a copy of the information that Egg would have provided at the time of the sale, so you can see what it says about pre-existing conditions. If the exclusions were in tiny print on page 17, you may want to question that as well?

However the FOS have a standard approach and they must think that the exclusions to do with pre-exising medical conditions were made clear in the paperwork / internet information.

I hope this helps!

Hi,

The FOS have sent me a copy of some of the paperwork Egg have provided them with, they have included what looks like T & C's but there is no date on them, how do I know they are the ones in force in 2001? This consists of 9 A4 pages so no page 17 with no smaller print.

jessie15

di3004 wrote: »

Hi there

So sorry to hear this.
May I ask if they have confirmed that your case will be passed on to an ombudsman for review of your complaint?
This is normally mentioned, if not then I would contact them and tell them you want this reviewed.

The fact that the policy was worthless to you because of medical conditions have been a waste of money to you, so in this case you have been deprived of your money.

Any further information I would send to the ombudsman for review.
Was the tick crossed in ink?

I would also mention the fact that if you knew you were paying for the ppi then you would have tried making a claim, but since looking through the details you were aware you were not protected anyway because of pre existing medical conditions.

I used to think ppi was part of it to be honest and was sold it when i was only receiving my children's benefits, that was back in 2001.

Contact them tomorrow if you get the chance (if the ombudsman have not been mentioned).
Good luck.

The letter does say I can have the Ombudsman look at it if I disagree.

Yes, if I had known I had it I could have complained a few times but never did.

This was an online application by the way.

jessie15

anamenottaken wrote: »

I think you need to work out why you didn't know you had PPI. There must have been regular payments for it.

Silly I know but I never checked the online statements.

roonaldo

egg have countered your argument, proved it was optional and as a non-advised sale, provided you with information to make an informed choice. I doubt Egg would have given your the card if you were only on benefits.

jessie15

roonaldo wrote: »

egg have countered your argument, proved it was optional and as a non-advised sale, provided you with information to make an informed choice. I doubt Egg would have given your the card if you were only on benefits.

How have Egg "proved" anything? none of their paperwork has any dates on it, someone could have just typed it up for all I know.

I was not on benefits I was in full time employment.

PPI_Technichal_Expert

di3004 wrote: »

Hi there

So sorry to hear this.
May I ask if they have confirmed that your case will be passed on to an ombudsman for review of your complaint?
This is normally mentioned, if not then I would contact them and tell them you want this reviewed.

The fact that the policy was worthless to you because of medical conditions have been a waste of money to you, so in this case you have been deprived of your money.

Any further information I would send to the ombudsman for review.
Was the tick crossed in ink?

I would also mention the fact that if you knew you were paying for the ppi then you would have tried making a claim, but since looking through the details you were aware you were not protected anyway because of pre existing medical conditions.

I used to think ppi was part of it to be honest and was sold it when i was only receiving my children's benefits, that was back in 2001.

Contact them tomorrow if you get the chance (if the ombudsman have not been mentioned).
Good luck.

Hi there. I don't want to sound harsh but I think ul be wasting ur time going to ombudsman. The polic was sold online meaning that it was sold on a non advised basis. They didn't have to ensure that the policy was suitable for ur needs by taking into account ur medical history. Egg only had to provide u with sufficient information about PEMC to enable you to make an informed decision. I'd imagine the adjudicator would have looked at how that information would have presented to you. It sounds as though the screenshots may be cirrent ones. This is common when the firm has no previous record of the screenshots on file. The firm would have shown a vectrus screenshot which shows the asnwers u selected at the time, this would indicate u selected it. In relation to the old screen shots I know it can be annoying but an adjudicator can only make a decision based on the evidence available. I completely agree with the adjudicators decision in that egg would be able to show u selected it and probably provided sufficient information in the screenshots. Ask ur adjudicator for a copy of the policy summary. The PEMC info must be in a policy summary for it to be sufficient info. If this is confirmed and shown to you then I'm afraid you don't have any chance. I hope this has helped somewhat