Barclaycard

kpwll

Hi folks,
My friend has received a final response (dated 06.09.11) re 1 of her claims (previously Goldfish) and they have rejected it because:

'the application for PPI was submitted by post. At the point of applying for PPI, the process required you to select the specific type of cover required. In this case you positively selected the product.'

They said nothing regarding the fact that she would have been unable to claim due to being unemployed and many ongoing pre-existing medical conditions.

She can't remember any details of taking out the card/PPI (presumably they were taken out at the same time) and it is feasible that she did put a X in the box.

Is she well and truly dead in the water or would it be worth taking to the FOS?

She also hasn't heard about the other claim (previously Morgan Stanley) although they were both submitted at the same time, previous update correspondence was sent from Barclaycard at the same time for the 2 separate claims. Do you think she may be lucky with this 1?

Karen

di3004

kpwll wrote: »

Hi folks,
My friend has received a final response (dated 06.09.11) re 1 of her claims (previously Goldfish) and they have rejected it because:

'the application for PPI was submitted by post. At the point of applying for PPI, the process required you to select the specific type of cover required. In this case you positively selected the product.'

They said nothing regarding the fact that she would have been unable to claim due to being unemployed and many ongoing pre-existing medical conditions.

She can't remember any details of taking out the card/PPI (presumably they were taken out at the same time) and it is feasible that she did put a X in the box.

Is she well and truly dead in the water or would it be worth taking to the FOS?

She also hasn't heard about the other claim (previously Morgan Stanley) although they were both submitted at the same time, previous update correspondence was sent from Barclaycard at the same time for the 2 separate claims. Do you think she may be lucky with this 1?

Karen

Hiya Karen

Did they confirm if this was the final response?
If not she could give it another go and maybe give further info, ask them to reconsider with this further information, such as they have not fully investigated all the reasons for the complaint.
Otherwise complain to the FOS.

I would tell her to chase up on the other complaint, hopefully this one will mean good news, fingers crossed.;)

kpwll

Cheers Di, yes it is the final response, they included the leaflet for the FOS and stated on the letter that if unhappy with the outcome she could take it there.

She gave them all the info re med. conditions on the FOS form they sent her. Would the X in the box be negated by the fact that she wouldn't have been able to claim, or is it that the X in the box is the over-riding fact?

Sorry to be a pain.

Karen x

di3004

kpwll wrote: »

Cheers Di, yes it is the final response, they included the leaflet for the FOS and stated on the letter that if unhappy with the outcome she could take it there.

She gave them all the info re med. conditions on the FOS form they sent her. Would the X in the box be negated by the fact that she wouldn't have been able to claim, or is it that the X in the box is the over-riding fact?

Sorry to be a pain.

Karen x

Hi Karen

You certainly not a pain lol.:D;)

I assumed any X shown would be the fact that it was insurance, I have not known it for anything else, but the thing here is with the X was it done in INK? If so the business would have done that then.

And not only that the policy was worthless to her, if she was to make a claim then she would not have been able to have a successful claim, and why should she pay out for something that is not fully protecting her where its worthless?

kpwll

Thanx again Di, will tell her to get in touch with FOS.

(Bet everyone is glad you're back online, lol)

Karen x