PPI Reclaiming Discussion Part 5

pernest53

Hi Headley 127. Thaks for your reply. My biggest problem is trying to obtain my refund of £300. I have made numerous phone call with emails and also sending a complaint but yet to make contact with Aims Review. In the meantime I have come across bad publicity with this company. I will pursue this and do the best I can to spread the word. I dont understand how these people are allowed to conduct business.

[Deleted User]

pernest53 wrote: »

Hi Headley 127. Thaks for your reply.

I think his post was a query all by itself about a completely different lender, it was not a response to your post!:)

You signed up for a Claims Company and paid £300 upfront, I don't think anyone here can help you reclaim it other than to advise you to contact the Ministry Of Justice .

Good luck with getting your money back.

Hadley127

Moneyineptitude ..... Thanks for the reply. I haven't got any of the old statements nor can I remember my old account number.

[Deleted User]

Hadley127 wrote: »

I haven't got any of the old statements nor can I remember my old account number.

You'll need to send a Subject Access Request (SAR) letter to American Express to get all the information they have, but you could try simply contacting them first to see what they say about your query.
Read the link I posted in my first reply to you, but don't be tempted to ask the Bank for the Credit Agreement as this isn't available on closed accounts.

auntieraine

Hi all,

Apologies if I do this wrong but it's my first post!
I am in the middle of a PPI claim with Capital One which I took to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman think I am right but Capital One have asked me to provide details of my temporary work when I took out the credit card and PPI. This was back in 2003 and I can't seem to find a P45 from my employer at the time. I have since contacted my past employer who say the only keep records for 6 years so have no record of my work there in 2003.
I wonder if anyone else has come up against this and how they got around it. I've been on the HMRC website for ages now and can't see anything there, I wondered if anyone knew if it is possible to get work history or a P45 from 2003 from them?

Thanks for your help!

amersall

Have you tried to get your p60 from your employer?, this is what you need as it shows earnings for the year, if they can't help then ask HMRC if they can.

craggus

First time poster on this thread, apologies if these sort of questions have been answered previously.


Stumbled across some paperwork recently from when we bought our house in 2001, and wondered if we may have a case for a PPI claim?


At the time, we were told by the estate agents (Taylors) that as we were first time buyers we would need to speak to their "independent advisors" before we could proceed with the house purchase, and being a bit wet behind the ears we did. This advisor pressured us into arranging a mortgage and house insurance there and then, with Northern Rock and Legal and General accordingly (we subsequently found out many years later that the advice was not independent at all, and that the financial adviser was actually affiliated with these companies, but that's another story!)


At the same time we were also told that it would be extremely foolish of us not to arrange for some sort of salary protection, so that we would not lose the house if one of us should be made redundant at any point... I believe this cover was with Legal and General also. I can't recall if we were ever told that it was compulsory, but we certainly had our arms twisted to buy it... we cancelled it several years later when we discovered that the cover was not as it had been described anyway (it would only start paying the mortgage after several months, and only up to a maximum of one year!).


Does this count as a mis-sold policy? Is it worth us looking further into initiating a PPI claim?


Any advice gratefully received...


Many thanks


Craig

[Deleted User]

craggus wrote: »

we were also told that it would be extremely foolish of us not to arrange for some sort of salary protection, so that we would not lose the house if one of us should be made redundant at any point…

This is good solid advice, not mis-selling.

craggus wrote: »

I can't recall if we were ever told that it was compulsory

Well you can hardly make an allegation of wrong-doing if you can't remember! With mortgage PPI, the advisors were allowed to "disturb" the customer because the insurance protects such a valuable commodity. In some cases, the PPI was compulsory.

craggus wrote: »

we cancelled it several years later when we discovered that the cover was not as it had been described anyway (it would only start paying the mortgage after several months, and only up to a maximum of one year!).

No PPI Policy started paying immediately because it takes into account the redundancy payment. How was it "not as described"? The terms of the policy would be clearly laid out in the paperwork you signed!
I'm not sure cancelling it was as wise as you may have thought.

craggus wrote: »

Does this count as a mis-sold policy?

Nothing you have said so far indicates any mis-selling, I'm afraid.

The vast majority of Mortgage PPI complaints are rejected because it does not suffer the same problems associated with credit card and loan policies.
It's still being marketed today and is a useful short term protection of your home should you lose your job.

dunstonh

At the same time we were also told that it would be extremely foolish of us not to arrange for some sort of salary protection, so that we would not lose the house if one of us should be made redundant at any point... I believe this cover was with Legal and General also. I can't recall if we were ever told that it was compulsory, but we certainly had our arms twisted to buy it... we cancelled it several years later when we discovered that the cover was not as it had been described anyway (it would only start paying the mortgage after several months, and only up to a maximum of one year!).

A lot of what you say is unprovable. It is also pre-regulation. Adviser sales only account for 0.2% of PPI complaints at the FOS and the majority of those are rejected. The reasons for that are 1) advisers only got involved with MPPI 2) MPPI is generally regarded as the one PPI worth having. Today, it is one of only two types of PPI still retailed. 3) advisers tend to have much better audit trails then unregulated sales 4) the majority of advisers only became regulated in January 2005 for insurance (so dont need to consider pre 2005 sale complaints)

You say you were pressured. However, advisers are required to disturb you on shortfalls and make you aware of them and the consequences. Some may see that as pressure. It is also possible you were given too much pressure but equally possible you were not but felt the risk of not being covered made it important to have. Either way, 13 years after the event means there is no evidence to support any allegation. Time erodes memory and it also erodes credibility when it comes to unprovable allegations. If you had made a complaint about pressure within a few weeks or months then you are credible even if there is no evidence. 13 years later and you are not.

Next we look at suitability. You had a mortgage and a need for cover. So, the product sold was suitable.

Finally, the complaint about their status. Lots of tied agents try to give the impression they are independent. As an IFA myself, I find that annoying as their actions often rub off on us. However, it is impossible to prove it all these years later. Plus, it may be that they were independent for mortgages but tied for insurance (the mortgage adviser type classifications didnt come in until October 2004. So back then, a mortgage adviser who could search the market may have referred to themselves as an independent mortgage adviser. That would make them an independent adviser if you abbreviate (they couldn't abbreviate like that but you can) but it would not make them an independent financial adviser. Their wording may not have broken any rules but may have steered you to allow you to make assumptions that are wrong. Either way, nothing you can prove and irrelevant about the sale.

craggus

Many thanks to you both for your prompt replies, very much appreciated - quite clearly we have no grounds for a claim so I shall not waste my time trying to take it any further!


The policy was not as described in as much as the verbal description of the policy did not match what was eventually provided to us. Quite clearly the fault here lies mainly with us, as we would have signed the final paperwork that would have clearly shown the policy was not the same as the one that had been "told" to us (like I said before, we were pretty wet behind the ears at the time!). Cancelling the policy did turn out to be as wise as we thought in the end though - by putting away the money we were paying for the cover every month in a savings account, we had saved the maximum amount we could ever claim on the policy within three years anyway!


Dunstonh - With regards to the financial adviser, I have found some of the original paperwork and you are absolutely correct... although they described themselves verbally as offering independent financial advice, their paperwork merely states "Independent Mortgage Advice". They certainly steered us towards house insurance that was not the cheapest, based upon their 'advice' which we had assumed to be independent. Again, another lesson learnt... all I can say is that we are more financially savvie now! As a matter of interest, how do you find a truly reliable IFA, and what should you be paying for their advice? (being independent, I assume you would receive no arrangement fees from providers). I am after advice regarding my current pension provisions (appreciate I am going off topic here, sorry)


Kind Regards


Craig