Rejected by HSBC, advice required

jonesy_mjj

I have recently received a letter from HSBC relating to my complaint about mid sold PPI on a credit card. In the letter they have stated that they do not believe I have a valid claim and have included 3 out of 6 pages of the credit agreement signed in 2006.

This credit agreement shows a signature for the PPI after a preticked box which did not give me the option to opt out. The letter also states that as i have not queried the ppi payments since the card was taken out until i submitted my complaint then i must have been happy with the product.

This letter is not their final response and states to contact them if I have any further relevant information.

Is the preticked box enough to query the issue further? Also should
I ask that the other 3 pages of the agreement are sent too?

Advice required please.

biondani

I would reply asking how you could have rejected the PPI at time of application as the box was pre ticked and therefore you understood it to be compulsory as any optional components to the loan should not have been preticked.

Ian

J_i_m

I'd write to them to request their final response, if it is unsatisfactory and you have a genuine reason for mis sale you can then take your case to the FOS.

jonesy_mjj

I have decided to write back pointing out that the pre ticked box didn't give enough opportunity to opt out of the policy and that the word optional does not appear around the description of the product.

As the agent in the branch did not make it clear that the product was optional does anyone feel that the above is enough for them to change their decision over?

magpiecottage

jonesy_mjj wrote: »

This credit agreement shows a signature for the PPI after a preticked box which did not give me the option to opt out.

Is that a signature for PPI or a signature to apply for the card (i.e. is there another signature box somewhere else to apply for the card itself)?

jonesy_mjj

Yes there is somewhere else to sign for the actual card. The box with the signature for the PPI is within a box where the PPI is preticked and the card protector is not. Within the box it does not mention that the PPI is optional and the advisor in the branch who sold the card merely said sign both boxes to conclude your application.

I know it might sound like picking at semantics but in some places in the agreement it refers to payment protection and in others it mentions optional payment protection. I genuinely thought they were 2 different products. Have I got a chance in hell?

dunstonh

The box with the signature for the PPI is within a box where the PPI is preticked and the card protector is not

Almost certainly "pre ticked" as they select the options on screen after discussing it with you and it prints with the tick in it or not depending on the option selected.

Within the box it does not mention that the PPI is optional

You wouldnt expect it to.

the advisor in the branch who sold the card merely said sign both boxes to conclude your application.

quite possibly but impossible to prove. Just as you could have been told everything correctly and its you telling porkies. Impossible to prove.

I know it might sound like picking at semantics but in some places in the agreement it refers to payment protection and in others it mentions optional payment protection. I genuinely thought they were 2 different products. Have I got a chance in hell?

I think it would be difficult to try and persuade someone that you thought payment protection was as a different product to payment protection.

jonesy_mjj

dunstonh wrote: »

I think it would be difficult to try and persuade someone that you thought payment protection was as a different product to payment protection.

When you put it that way it does sound ludicrous but fact one was preceeded with the word optional and the other wasn't I thought they were different products. How naive I was!