PPI Reclaiming Discussion Part 5

-taff

The_Mango_Tree wrote: »

MBNA - I have put this up on another thread but this seems the right one. I had an MBNA credit card from January 1998. I got into financial trouble in 2005 and the debt was sold onto Link Financial. I have a copy of my original Application form where I specifically ticked the 'no' to say that I didn't want Payment Protection Cover (as MBNA called it). I have written to them with some evidence that I had various life insurance and critical illness policies, savings plans and shareholdings in excess of 130,000 plus 8 years of service at the company I worked for (so could expect at least the legal minimum redundancy payment). I alerted them to all these policies because they say they could not make a decision based purely on saying 'no' on my application.

My thinking here is that this cannot be a 'non-advised' sale because I said 'no' to it on the application form. And, if this was an 'advised' sale it was appalling advice because I had plenty of policies, savings and so on. My question is, is there anything else I can be doing here to strengthen my claim? I had thought that a copy of the original application form would suffice, but as a couple of the experts on this site have suggested when I posted this originally, they said that MBNA might say it was done on the phone.

It's your circumstances at the time of the sale that are important, not what your circumstances were after.
If you had all those policies at the time of sale, then furnish them with copies and ask them to investigate properly.

It's still true that a lot CC PPI was sold over the telephone at a later date, so you would have to find an argument that you didn't agree to it then, although again, copies of your insurance would help there.
If you have statements to check, see when it was first applied to your balance.

Also, any redress will first go towards amounts written off or arrears.

[Deleted User]

The_Mango_Tree wrote: »

I had thought that a copy of the original application form would suffice, but as a couple of the experts on this site have suggested when I posted this originally, they said that MBNA might say it was done on the phone.

MBNA would only respond with this if it were true, of course. The reason it's been mentioned as likely, though, is that (despite what Claims Companies may say in their ads) PPI was not randomly added to finance without the permission or knowledge of the customer. It's therefore more than possible that you ticked no to PPI at the original application and then agreed to it at a later stage.

No one here can suggest ways to "strengthen" your complaint, just make certain everything you say is truthful (and accurate).

Apart from all this, do note that any monies written off as part of your default on this card are liable to be off set from any redress you might win if your complaint is successful.

The_Mango_Tree

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

MBNA would only respond with this if it were true, of course. The reason it's been mentioned as likely, though, is that (despite what Claims Companies may say in their ads) PPI was not randomly added to finance without the permission or knowledge of the customer. It's therefore more than possible that you ticked no to PPI at the original application and then agreed to it at a later stage.

No one here can suggest ways to "strengthen" your complaint, just make certain everything you say is truthful (and accurate).

Apart from all this, do note that any monies written off as part of your default on this card are liable to be off set from any redress you might win if your complaint is successful.

Thank you. Yes, everything I have said is truthful and with evidence where I have been able to locate it (confirmation of share sales, PEPs, Insurance policy documents and copies of statements showing that money was being paid out to various insurance companies).

I have had two PPI complaints upheld where the money was not written off. However, this must be a complex business working it all out. As the PPI paid totals close to 5000 that would need to be taken off the total, the interest that I paid on it at that time as well and then pro-rata reducing the amount that they sold the debt on for (it was likely to have been bundled anyway). And the biggest point of all - would I have defaulted on the account if the total owed was reduced by, say 50% at all. I would suggest the last one is a legally contestable point. Good luck to them working all of that out.

I was amazed by the way, that even though the account was sold to Link in 2005, when I phoned this morning to confirm a couple of points that they still asked for my Grandmother's maiden name for ID purposes. It suggests that they may still have rather more info about me and my account than I had thought.

[Deleted User]

The_Mango_Tree wrote: »

would I have defaulted on the account if the total owed was reduced by, say 50% at all.

I don't think you can argue that PPI accounted for 50% of the amount you owed, I'm afraid.

Regardless, this is irrelevant to a PPI mis-selling complaint and so it is far from the "biggest point of all"

Do also remember that the other banks failing to off set is no guide to how this complaint may be handled.

-taff

The_Mango_Tree wrote: »

And the biggest point of all - would I have defaulted on the account if the total owed was reduced by, say 50% at all. I would suggest the last one is a legally contestable point. Good luck to them working all of that out..

If you had in excess of 130,000 savings & shareholdings, then I think it's fair to say yes, you would have, no matter what the PPI.

The_Mango_Tree

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I don't think you can argue that PPI accounted for 50% of the amount you owed, I'm afraid.

Regardless, this is irrelevant to a PPI mis-selling complaint and so it is far from the "biggest point of all"

Do also remember that the other banks failing to off set is no guide to how this complaint may be handled.

Irrelevant to the complaint yes of course but certainly not to the position the account would have been in had PPI not been applied.

The 50% is, if I was a politician speaking, not inaccurate. I would rack-up a very large credit card bill - say 8-10,000, pay the minimum , consequently have a large monthly PPI payment each month and then pay the whole lot off every 6 months or so.

Anyway, I am getting ahead of myself - I need the complaint to be upheld first!

The_Mango_Tree

-taff wrote: »

If you had in excess of 130,000 savings & shareholdings, then I think it's fair to say yes, you would have, no matter what the PPI.

I don't understand the reply? They were the circumstances when I took the credit card (1998). Not when I defaulted (2005).

bondgirl77

Hello, Natwest have sent my husband a letter inviting him to put in a claim for missold PPI on a bank loan he took out in 2005. He had a stroke in 2007 and it has affected his memory and he cannot even remember taking out the loan, let alone whether he was missold PPI! We don't have any of the original paperwork or anything.

Is it worth filling in the form? Also are there any links to good phrases to use?

Thanks

[Deleted User]

bondgirl77 wrote: »

Is it worth filling in the form?

Since the Bank are inviting him to complain his chances of success are significantly increased as long as he has valid mis-selling reasons.
Go here for more;
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-loan-insurance

You won't need to apply for the agreement, the Bank already have the details.

zdoll_2

hi, just wanted to encourage anyone who thinks even slightest possibility of a ppi claim, last week i received £6200 from hsbc from 2 loans from several years ago all from writing 1 letter and filling in 1 form, try it!