Time barred claim

bubbles108

We took out a second mortgage in 2004 taking out a PPI at the same time. The mortgage was paid off in October 2006.
We tried to make a claim re mis selling of the PPI to be informed by both the finance company and FLA that our claim was time barred under the 1980 Limitation Act.
We thought that the 6 year limit was the date from when the PPI was stopped not started.

We have contacted an Independent company who are now acting on our behalf. Our concern isa they are starting from the beginning as if this is a new claim which we are also confused about.
Has anyone had the same experience

amersall

bubbles108 wrote: »

We took out a second mortgage in 2004 taking out a PPI at the same time. The mortgage was paid off in October 2006.
We tried to make a claim re mis selling of the PPI to be informed by both the finance company and FLA that our claim was time barred under the 1980 Limitation Act.
We thought that the 6 year limit was the date from when the PPI was stopped not started.

We have contacted an Independent company who are now acting on our behalf. Our concern isa they are starting from the beginning as if this is a new claim which we are also confused about.
Has anyone had the same experience

Please dont use the claims co until you have posted your query on here.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=187

Dunstonh and Magpie cottage know about mortgages,you may be on a losing battle with this,please get their guidance before you end up losing money.

dunstonh

Our concern isa they are starting from the beginning as if this is a new claim which we are also confused about.

Probably hoping that the lender wont spot it as a new complaint. However, chances are they will and will refer the complaint back to their original decision. Some banks have not been very good on linking complaints so the claims company is probably taking a chance on that assumption. The claism company also know that it is game over on the first complaint and it is probably just some sales rep at the claims company hoping to make some money off you as they are often paid by referral (whether there is a case to answer or not).

I dont know why you used a claims company though. If both the lender and the FLA are rejecting it, then the claims company won't get anywhere. Claims companies use the same free of charge complaints process you use. Hopefully, you havent paid any money up front for this as you can kiss that goodbye.

We thought that the 6 year limit was the date from when the PPI was stopped not started.

I dont know if the FLA work the same way as the FSA.

FSA DISP 2.3.1R (1)(c) that say that the ombudsman cannot normally consider a complaint if the complainant refers it to us:

more than six years after the event complained of;
or (if later)
more than three years from the date on which they became aware (or ought reasonably to have become aware) that they had cause for complaint.

If it was an FSA regulated case, you would appear to fall foul of the above.. As it is FLA, I will leave that one to magpiecottage as I dont know their limits. However, the FLA would know the limits and they would have verified this in their response to your complaint.

magpiecottage

An ambulance chaser will be of no use to you and by going back over previous ground seem to demonstrate their incompetence - they can only follow procedures.

Nor, I suspect, will the Finance Leasing Association.

Questions:

Who is the loan with?

Who arranged the loan for you? (May have been an independent finance broker)

If the loan was arranged by a broker did they or the lender arrange the PPI?

Was the PPI on a monthly premium basis or a single premium added to the loan?

bubbles108

Hi

The loan was with First National A GE Company and the PPI premium was added to the original loan. The loan was arranged through a broker but we think the PPI itself was via a company recommended by the finance company .

We wrote to the company to make a claim in relation to being mis sold the PPI which they rejected. They advised if we were not happy with their decision we should complain to FLA which we did to be told it was time barred.

At this point I felt like giving up as I thought the next step would be taking it to court. That is why we decided to use a company to act on our behalf. They charge nothing up front just a percentage if they win, we thought they would use a different approach and would be likely to have more success.

I was really disappointed to see they were just covering old ground again.

Is it worth contacting them to withdraw our permission for them to act on our behalf or are we fighting a losing battle

Thanks

dunstonh

We wrote to the company to make a claim in relation to being mis sold the PPI which they rejected. They advised if we were not happy with their decision we should complain to FLA which we did to be told it was time barred.

Thats it then. Its game over. A time bar means that the company doenst have to consider your complaint. No matter how many times you complain or different post boxes are used, the response will be the same.

At this point I felt like giving up as I thought the next step would be taking it to court.

Bad idea. PPI is not unlawful. Single premium PPI is not unlawful either. Even the likes of black horse who have a near 99% uphold rate with the FOS have won in court. Claims companies rarely initiate legal action. Mainly as most are not qualified or experienced enough to do so and mainly as the courts are more likely to rule against you and you end up with costs.

Is it worth contacting them to withdraw our permission for them to act on our behalf or are we fighting a losing battle

I think you are fighting a losing battle. If it was just the firm then moving on to the FLA would have made sense. However, with the FLA verifying it is timebarred then its a no hope case. The claims company will just create more work with no benefit.

magpiecottage

bubbles108 wrote: »

We tried to make a claim re mis selling of the PPI to be informed by both the finance company and FLA that our claim was time barred under the 1980 Limitation Act.
We thought that the 6 year limit was the date from when the PPI was stopped not started.

Going back to this, the six year limit runs from the time the alleged negligence took place - which is the advice to take out a product which was unsuitable.

There is, though a further limit - three years from when you become aware, or ought to have become aware, that you had cause for complaint.

That, in theory, could allow you to still pursue a complaint, The Financial Ombudsman Service would probably entertain such a complaint but for that to be the case, the sale would have needed to be under the General Insurance Standards Council's code.

Some GE cases were, some weren't so it may be worth taking the matter to FOS. If it accepts it, then explain that you were misled into believing it could not and as a result asked a claims company for help - so you want to claim for its fee as a result of the misleading response to the original complaint.


We have contacted an Independent company who are now acting on our behalf. Our concern isa they are starting from the beginning as if this is a new claim which we are also confused about.
Has anyone had the same experience[/QUOTE]

bubbles108

Hi

The original letter we had from GE Money Home Finance Ltd rejecting our claim states that they have never been members of General Insurance Standards Council so advised us to contact FLA if we wanted to take our complaint further which we unsuccessfully did.
I am assuming therefore the FOS would not be interested. Is it worth contacting FLA again citing the 3 years from when we became aware as our cause for complaint?

Thanks again

dunstonh

I am assuming therefore the FOS would not be interested.

that would be the case.

Is it worth contacting FLA again citing the 3 years from when we became aware as our cause for complaint?

That is an FSA rule so wont apply here.