PPI Reclaiming Discussion Part 5

KevWinter

Hi, I've tried contacting LLoyds to query if I was sold ppi but have found them obstructing and I have got nowhere.

My problems are as follows:
I had 2 smallish loans with Llloyds but I dont have any paperwork, remember the exact dates or the full amounts as my memory is useless. The loans were taken out 15 to 20 years ago so i dont think it will be on my credit record.

I've heard of a sar request, am I wasting my time or is it still worth doing?

-taff

It's up to you.

[Deleted User]

KevWinter wrote: »

Hi, I've tried contacting LLoyds to query if I was sold ppi but have found them obstructing and I have got nowhere.

In what way were they "obstructing" ? If they simply told you they had no record of your finance from two decades ago I'd be inclined to believe them. Your choice whether to chance £10 on a Subject Access Request (SAR) letter which will likely just confirm what they have already told you,

KevWinter

I contacted them through their website and they sent me a text to say they would communicate via text throughout the investigation, they then sent a text while i was on holiday saying they hadn't received a response to their questionnaire which I hadn't been sent. Next thing I knew I had a letter saying the investigation was closed as I hadn't provided required documentation.

I phoned them up and they promised to open the complaint and resent the document but that was weeks ago and I've not had any texts or documents, I assume my complaint is still closed.

[Deleted User]

KevWinter wrote: »

I assume my complaint is still closed.

I assume you didn't make an actual complaint though?

Surely you just asked them to confirm or deny whether you had PPI?

If not, how could you "complain" about PPI which you are not even certain you had?

Sounds like your "complaint" has been closed because you failed to provide any evidence of PPI and they don't have any either.

Best approach is to ask directly and with no ambiguity if you had PPI and then only progress to complaint if they reply in the affirmative and you can somehow show it was mis-sold to you..

Daver

I wonder if anyone can help on here? I had a car loan in 2003-2006 with finance from VWFS that was provided through the dealership, at the time I was just about to start a new job and the finance officer at the dealership did everything possible to get the PPI included, very pushy and the usual, better rate, more likely to get accepted etc. I have approached VW Financial services for the paperwork and they have written back saying the PPI claim is with the dealership, Horners, who went bust in 2013. I am not sure if I can claim or not, Horners Manchester ltd as a dealership does still exist in Manchester but the original horners was Horners Motor Group Ltd so I don't think the two are actually connected

[Deleted User]

If the dealer is no more, you have no one to complain to.

[Deleted User]

Daver wrote: »

I had a car loan in 2003-2006

If the loan was taken out prior to January 2005 then any insurance policy sale is pre-regulation.

Daver wrote: »

I have approached VW Financial services for the paperwork

So you have no documentation to support your allegations.

Daver wrote: »

the PPI claim is with the dealership, Horners, who went bust in 2013. I am not sure if I can claim or not

If you purchased the PPI in 2005 or later you can refer your complaint to FSCS, any earlier and there is no one left to complain to.

Fridaydalek

Of course Martin puts the success stories up front - that's completely understandable. But my experience shows that - even when you know you are in the right - the ombudsman may side with the bank.

When we first took out a mortgage in 1995 with the Halifax, we had pressure put on us to buy PPI for the loan. At the time, we didn't know it wasn't mandatory; we just thought it was a necessary extra part of getting a mortgage. We were first time buyers, and never having been through the process before, took what the in-house mortgage rep told us at face value.

We were able to track down all the relevant bank statements etc and made a claim this year. We used Resolver and set out our claim. The Halifax responded with a 30 minute phone call to take down all the details, and then a couple of weeks later sent us a report as to why they were not accepting it.

They glossed over the fact that we were told it was compulsory, and instead focused on our financial situation at the time, and told us that as I couldn't remember just how big my savings were in 1995 (!) nor what sickness benefits my then employer offered, I was "eligible" for PPI, and therefore not mis-sold it. The sales pressure didn't come into it.

I went to the ombudsman and told them the Halifax had ignored the basis of my claim, and instead focused on other areas. I got asked the same questions by the ombudsman! "What sickness benefit did you have at the time, what were your savings?"

The ombudsman told us they had "no evidence" that we were pressurised at the time of the mortgage meeting. Well, the evidence is that I was there and can tell them what happened. But of course I can't prove it - funnily enough, I didn't think to record the conversation and keep it for 22 years.

And of course, you could look at it that there's "no evidence" that there wasn't high pressure sales, so the shoe's on the other foot. But the ombudsman found in favour of the Halifax.

So here's my advice: put a claim in by all means, but don't assume you'll get anywhere even if you have paperwork and you know you're in the right.

dunstonh

But my experience shows that - even when you know you are in the right - the ombudsman may side with the bank.

How about the majority of cases where the FOS side with the consumer?
Broadly speaking, the FOS are slightly consumer biased.

When we first took out a mortgage in 1995 with the Halifax, we had pressure put on us to buy PPI for the loan.

Sales pressure is allowed. So, nothing wrong there.

At the time, we didn't know it wasn't mandatory;

You have just contradicted yourself. If it was mandatory there would be no pressure put on you to buy it.

They glossed over the fact that we were told it was compulsory,

Did you provide any evidence to back up your allegation?

and told us that as I couldn't remember just how big my savings were in 1995 (!) nor what sickness benefits my then employer offered, I was "eligible" for PPI, and therefore not mis-sold it. The sales pressure didn't come into it.

First time buyer, probably using most of what you had on the property purchase. Sounds like a good reason to have MPPI. Contradictions on sales process (one minute told to you have it, next minute pressurised). Seems the right decision was made.

Well, the evidence is that I was there and can tell them what happened. But of course I can't prove it - funnily enough, I didn't think to record the conversation and keep it for 22 years.

How do they know you are telling the truth. Especially as you are inconsistent. Every fraudulent/try-it-on complaint says the same thing as you. Its an automatic complaint reason for most claims companies to use in their template whether it happened or not.

And of course, you could look at it that there's "no evidence" that there wasn't high pressure sales, so the shoe's on the other foot. But the ombudsman found in favour of the Halifax.

Which is the basis of English law.