GE Home Finance - MPPI Court ot Not?

marshallka

magpiecottage wrote: »

Don't kid yourself - they are looking to make an easy buck as much as those who missold PPI!

MSE are actually asking is they should be recommending the best PPI claims handlers

http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2011/05/31/should-mse-be-recommending-the-best-ppi-claims-handlers/

dunstonh

marshallka wrote: »

MSE are actually asking is they should be recommending the best PPI claims handlers

http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2011/05/31/should-mse-be-recommending-the-best-ppi-claims-handlers/

Martin, based on his comments on Watchdog, seems to have this misconception of what a claims company actually does. Maybe if he saw the thousands of near identical template letters that the claims companies use which are virtual copies of the free ones you get on this site, he would change his views. Or if he read the posts in this section by those getting ripped off by these parasites.

On Watchdog he suggested they use the legal methods. Yet it is against MoJ rule to cold call where the possibility of legal action is required. So, if they do that and then go down the legal route they are in breach of MoJ rules. The courts also seem to be more likely to reject PPI mis-sale complaints as we have seen on this board. The FSA themselves reckon that the majority of all PPI sales except MPPI are likely mis-sold. So, why bother with a claims company.

marshallka

dunstonh wrote: »

Martin, based on his comments on Watchdog, seems to have this misconception of what a claims company actually does. Maybe if he saw the thousands of near identical template letters that the claims companies use which are virtual copies of the free ones you get on this site, he would change his views. Or if he read the posts in this section by those getting ripped off by these parasites.

On Watchdog he suggested they use the legal methods. Yet it is against MoJ rule to cold call where the possibility of legal action is required. So, if they do that and then go down the legal route they are in breach of MoJ rules. The courts also seem to be more likely to reject PPI mis-sale complaints as we have seen on this board. The FSA themselves reckon that the majority of all PPI sales except MPPI are likely mis-sold. So, why bother with a claims company.

We really have no idea of "truth" about courts and legal methods from this site. I would say that genuine legal people who do not specialise in "just" PPI complaints would not have the time or money to come onto a site like this. They must be busy earning their £500+ an hour and scouring through any loopholes they can find in the law to make money for themselves and also others who the "free" system has failed regardless of what the FSA says.

There will always be "trollers" out to ruin reputations of claims companies as we know (competition). I said from years ago when I complained to MOJ about "cold calls" I was told by MOJ that my data was most probably sourced from a loan whereby I had ticked a box to "allow" my data to be passed about. I know we never did that but trying to prove it was another thing.

Template letters are mostly the same for complaints because the letters all contain the main reasons for misselling so are going to be alike. I really doubt that Martin would mind his reclaim letter being used. Perhaps his actual "homepage" on reclaiming PPI he would but not his letter.

dunstonh

We really have no idea of "truth" about courts and legal methods from this site.

Not just from this site. You had the black horse case in court last year which they won. yet we know the FOS are something like 99% in favour of consumer on that.

ianhillwoodville

Hi dunstonh,

Which BH case do you have a link. My first post here was wheter court was worth it.

Thanks

ianhillwoodville

OK another quick question here. Just got lots of docs back on my loan. It was unregulated under CCA and settled using rule of 78. Now the loan was taken out before regulation but settled after (Aug 2006). So can I go to the compmnay and FOS on unfair settlement as at the time of settlement the company was regulated or does it only apply to date taken out.

This is not specifically PPI related but more general. I note the High Court has found Rule of 78 unfair for pre-regulated loans but is this OFT or FOS????

If it is FOS is it worth adding it on to my PPI claim too????

marshallka

ianhillwoodville wrote: »

OK another quick question here. Just got lots of docs back on my loan. It was unregulated under CCA and settled using rule of 78. Now the loan was taken out before regulation but settled after (Aug 2006). So can I go to the compmnay and FOS on unfair settlement as at the time of settlement the company was regulated or does it only apply to date taken out.

This is not specifically PPI related but more general. I note the High Court has found Rule of 78 unfair for pre-regulated loans but is this OFT or FOS????

If it is FOS is it worth adding it on to my PPI claim too????

Apparently the rule 78 complaint falls under a Consumer Credit Complaint and FOS did not have jurisdiction of those that just had CCL until April, 2007 and the agreements have to have been taken out since April, 2007 I think.

Rule 78 was something that the OFT "asked" for firms (non status and in the sub prime sector) to stop using on unregulated agreements. It was "unfair" but I think that the courts are your only option on that one.

BH court case here

Just google Blackhorse courtcase PPI

ianhillwoodville

Thanks Marshallka,

Seems like a case then.

roonaldo

marshallka wrote: »

I noted your MPPI or PPI was sold by Purple Loans (your other thread)? If that is correct and GE are just the lender then the complaint is against the ones that sold the PPI? Have you complained to them yet?

FYI, GE Money bought Purple Loans

marshallka

roonaldo wrote: »

FYI, GE Money bought Purple Loans

Sorry roonaldo. I was just looking at the OP other thread and I thought it was strange that no-one had said to claim against the broker. I did not know they were two of the same. Thanks.