Motor finance PPI

Irnbru_3

I have contacted a motor finance company about the mis-selling of PPI to me, and was told to speak to a company who held the PPI, this company had ceased trading in 2008 (got finance policy in 2007), got the FSCS involved to which another company has said they have the PPI policy:mad:

The FSCS have replied to me saying im not eligible for a refund of the PPI as the PPI policy was not part of the loan and that the policy was set up on a monthly renewable basis so no losses where incurred regarding premiums etc.:mad::mad:

I was paying the finance company the agreed amount per month, so surely the PPI WAS part of the loan as I was paying the finance company who told me what the repayments inc PPI would be?

Also, I dont understand what "a monthly renewable basis" has to do with anything, FSCS said I had 30 days to cancel the PPI policy when the finance was taken out, but surely if its monthly renewable I could have cancelled it anytime, which I would have if I knew.

I had finished the loan early with an agreed settlement figure to which I think the PPI was included, should I have got a refund on the outstanding PPI then?

Can I take this any further?
Help!

di3004

Hi there

As far as I'm aware the company who sold you and set up the ppi is the ones you pursue, so if the Motor company had set this up with the finance at the start its them you complain to.

If though you wanted to make a claim, for example, sickness/unemployment (if it was that type of policy) you would need to contact the Insurer to make a claim with them direct, but as this is about a reclaim and not a reclaim, it would be in my opinion the motor finance company.

Sometimes they get confused with a reclaim and a claim.

Irnbru_3

I have spoken to the insurer on the phone and they said they were the insurer and that the finance company were the broker, so basically the broker sells you the policy?

shazfrost

Hope this helps - i spoke to the fos helpline yesterday about the same situation. He said you have to pursue the motor company first (broker) who sold you the car but they will likely respond and say its not them blah blah blah.. at that point contact the ombudsman and they will then pursue it with the underwriters eg axa (also worth knowing if the motor company were not fsa regulated at the time you were sold your policy pre 2005 usually)

He said that the insurer will then probably reply that any mis-sell was not down to them but the broker but as long as you have already contacted them and had an unsatisfactory response that is your reason for having to pursue the underwriter

hope that makes sense as im only a newbie to this too!.. im going for ACF car finance in the same situation!

Good luck!

magpiecottage

shazfrost wrote: »

Hope this helps - i spoke to the fos helpline yesterday about the same situation. He said you have to pursue the motor company first (broker) who sold you the car but they will likely respond and say its not them blah blah blah.. at that point contact the ombudsman and they will then pursue it with the underwriters eg axa (also worth knowing if the motor company were not fsa regulated at the time you were sold your policy pre 2005 usually)

He said that the insurer will then probably reply that any mis-sell was not down to them but the broker but as long as you have already contacted them and had an unsatisfactory response that is your reason for having to pursue the underwriter

Unfortunately, the FOS helpline gives out this guidance based on limited information and it is legally incorrect. You can only pursue the insurer if it has done something wrong.

In most cases, it collects premiums and provides cover. That is what it is authorised to do and there is nothing wrong with it.

In some cases, the policy is sold by somebody acting as its Representative. When that happens, the insurer accepts responsibility for the sale. (Note that a "Representative" need not necessarily be an employee of the insurer).

As far as I am aware, nobody has, to date, succeeded in a complaint against an insurer about the actions of an intermediary that was not its Representative. If they did, and the case was of any size, I think the insurer would almost certainly seek a judicial review because it would not want the floodgates opened.

In reality there is one, and only one, scenario in which I think an insurer could be legitimately awarded redress. This would be if, at the time of the sale, the insurer subscribed to the General Insurance Council's code of practice and the intermediary did not. That would amount to a breach of the code by the insurer because it prohibited accepting business from intermediaries who did not subscribe.

Your complaint would then be that, but for this breach, you would not have been able to be sold the policy and therefore it is liable for your losses.

Irnbru_3

Could I ask the insurer if they did subscribe to the GIC code of practice?

The FSCS said that the insurer was issuing the PPI on a monthly renewable basis, but I have evidence saying the PPI will last for the duration of the finance (60 months), and if I wanted to make a claim on the PPI I would still have to make the PPI premiums.

Surely this is not monthly renewable?

They also said it was not part of the loan, the finance co. provided the quotation of finance plus PPI and GAP, not without. So surely the PPI is part of the policy even though its with a different company?