Mppi

MUM40

Anybody claimed for misselling on a MPPI ?

dunstonh

Yes.

However, every single financial product going can be potentially mis-sold. So, without any context as to why you think it was mis-sold it doesnt really mean anything.

There are far less mis-sold MPPi plans and the complaints to uphold rate is much lower than normal PPI. Partly as MPPI is still seen as best advice and that most are paying it how it should be set up (monthly). The main mis-sales on MPPI are single premium, added to mortgage. They are nearly always bad.

marshallka

I have to beg to differ on complaint data for MPPI. I had one at FOS that was consistently called PPI all the way through the complaint so I would say that included in PPI complaints are lots of MPPI complaints. When queried I was told it was still a form of payment protection.

dunstonh

I have to beg to differ on complaint data for MPPI.

I am going by the FSA published data that put MPPI at around 40% compared to over 90% for PPI.

I had one at FOS that was consistently called PPI all the way through the complaint so I would say that included in PPI complaints are lots of MPPI complaints.

Doesnt mean anything.

marshallka

dunstonh wrote: »

I am going by the FSA published data that put MPPI at around 40% compared to over 90% for PPI.



Doesnt mean anything.

Sorry, I thought the FSA published data was to do with FOS?? I know that when FOS publish data for PPI it includes sales of MPPI and that is what I meant because FOS call MPPI the same as PPI.

dunstonh

The FSA data looked at the different types of PPI and gave its report on each type.

Some quotes from the FSA

from FSA thematic review:

Our visit findings suggest that the 15 firms in our sample selling regular
premium PPI in the prime mortgage sector generally had better levels of
compliance in this aspect of their business compared to the other sectors
(revolving credit, unsecured lending and sub-prime mortgages/secured loans)
and so they posed a lower risk. Because of this, the majority of the visit
findings in this report relate to the 30 firms operating in these other sectors.

from thematic review about single premium:

Advice on PPI was often likely to be of poor quality. Most firms selling on an
advised basis did not have systems in place to assess suitability adequately.
We were particularly concerned about the failure to properly assess whether
PPI is needed by the customer and the lack of consideration of the cost of the
policy. We were also concerned about the presumption by firms in the subprime
mortgage/secured lending market that single premium, as opposed to
regular premium, policies are suitable. These firms did not sufficiently
consider the aspects of single premium policies that do not meet customers’
costs and flexibility needs. In line with these findings, the documents
(statement of demands and needs) most firms gave customers about the
advice they had received were not helpful. They were too generalised and
lacking in customer-specific information. (See paras 4.15-4.19.)

from the FSA thematic review update 2:

Our latest work has confirmed our earlier findings that sales of regular premium
prime mortgage PPI, on an advised basis, are most likely to meet our requirements.
We found that the processes and controls around the selling of this specific product
are likely to result in a more thorough assessment of the customer’s demands and
needs when arranging protection insurance

I cant find the actual publication that went into the breakdown but it was over 90% failure for loan and credit card and around 40% for mortgage with single premium being the killer there. 40% failure is still very high. To put it in context, contracting out of SERPS had a failure rate of just 1.5%. What the report didnt do is break down how much of that 40% was single premium. However, the fact they say advised monthly premium MPPI were mostly likely to meet FSA requirements does more or less say that monthly is fine and single is bad and the sub prime borrowers were more likely to be the ones getting the bad product.

leezoeharley

I have complained about mis-sold MPPI and was refunded almost £6K!

dunstonh

leezoeharley wrote: »

I have complained about mis-sold MPPI and was refunded almost £6K!

Single premium or regular?
What was the reason your complaint was upheld?

Please provide some context.

leezoeharley

dunstonh wrote: »

Single premium or regular?
What was the reason your complaint was upheld?

Please provide some context.

I have simply responded to the OP's original question, however, as you have asked me to expand please see below:

Our MPPI was regular monthly payments over a period of almost 7 years and our complaint was upheld as our financial needs were not correctly assessed at the point of sale despite making work benefits clear they were dismissed and we were advised that we had to have the banks product to stand in a better position to get the original mortgage, so it was a case of our word against the banks financial advisor and we were successful.

MUM40

that's for all your comments, we have decided to try for mis-sell MPPI. Ours was with the dreaded FP, stupid I know, but we did feel under pressure upon the sales call.


My letters have gone off to FP, so I will wait and see what happens.

dunstonh

FP as in first plus? or friends provident?

If first plus, then its unlikely to be MPPI as First Plus were mostly second charge mortgages/secured loans. It is more likely to be PPI on much the same basis of loan PPI.

MPPI is typically retailed with or used to cover first charge mortgages.