PPI Compensation

Gavogel

Hi.

I've made three PPI credit card claims, and two have been successful. However, I'm not satisfied with the offer that has been made in either case.

Apart from repayment of the premiums and interest, can I claim compensation for the misselling of the products, and, if so, to what sort of level?

Any advice would be gratefully received.

Gavin.

DrSqueeze

There is a "standard" method of redress, which essentially is a refund of the premiums (and any interest you paid on them) plus interest on the total (it's a little more complicated than that, but that's the general rule). The idea is to ensure you are no worse off financially than you would have been if the PPI had not been added.

If you expect an additional payment, then you need to show them that their actions caused you additional costs. For example, if a PPI premium caused you to exceed your credit limit one month and you incurred a charge, then you can argue that it wouldn't have happened without the PPI and ask for a refund of that charge.

ALIBOBSY

DS is right I have seen others trying to argue (some sucessfully some not) that the PPI led to charges (so these should also be refunded, plus interest), also that any default again was caused or at least contributed to by the PPI being on and should be removed as it does not reflect the true state of the account at that time.
If you can argue the default shouldn't be there then in court you court argue material loss ie applied for a credit card/mortgage which was turned down so you had to take higher cost lending/couldn't move/whatever this can open things up to compensation of many thousands. BUT the FOS seem less open to these arguements.
Other things to argue are time you spend preparing and dealing with the complaint to the OC and then the FOS plus any postage and phone call costs.
I have seen a few claims where people have asked and got a few hundred in compensation on top of the normal redress. May be worth a letter argueing any relavent points and see if they up the offer worst they can say is no.

Ali x

magpiecottage

ALIBOBSY wrote: »

the FOS seem less open to these arguements.

That is because FOS use low grade staff who do not really understand these issues. Case in point, the Chief Ombudsman who has no financial services background whatsoever and another ombudsman who this time last year was running a call centre for a telecoms company but by January was deciding complex complaints involving trust arrangements.

Gavogel

Many thanks for all your comments. Very helpful.