PPI Reclaiming Discussion Part 5

dunstonh

The only credit I can think of that may have had PPI was a 2 year fixed mortgage I had with Northern Rock from 2009-2011 but I have no idea how I can find more details about my account or whether I had any PPI on it.

Look at your bank statements to see if you had a monthly direct debit for PPI. NR didnt bundled their PPI into the mortgage. It was standalone.

Doorboy1

My application was by post, and I'm sure I did'nt want ppi as I mentioned before I had a separate insurance to cover me and I included a copy to cap one, in the rejection letter it states they have supplied a copy of my application & ppi document but all I got was the standard letter

Nasqueron

Doorboy1 wrote: »

My application was by post, and I'm sure I did'nt want ppi as I mentioned before I had a separate insurance to cover me and I included a copy to cap one, in the rejection letter it states they have supplied a copy of my application & ppi document but all I got was the standard letter

Your choice then:

1) Prove they faked the form by ticking it and you never noticed until now
2) Refer to FOS and see what they say (free and impartial)

Precisioncars

Any legal advise would be great on this story.

My wife and I took out a mortgage via Igroup broker Rainbow homeloans ltd in 2003.
this had a ppi attached £3000.
I wrote to Igroup/ge with a response of there not liable the broker is. I understand this is correct. Any way I left it a few months and asked Iroup for loan agreement and paperwork from said mortgage (i already had a copy of the agreement). Have now had the info from Igroup. Findings are not good??
1. The complete original loan agreement was all hand written in relevant boxes not typed as is the original copy i had originally. Now the page of the agreemnt with a the figures on which they have sent to me has been typed but the other parts are hand written as they should be. Find this odd as all the figures are different incuding ppi cost also date has been changed and looks as if the signatures have been forged??
on this I would say that Igroup sold the ppi to us as they changed all the figures from original signed agreement.
2. Also on some paperwork they have sent us states in the terms that broker fee and ppi would be paid direct to broker. In the paperwork there is proof that this did not happen The PPi was paid direct to Igroup financial services. I have also contacted cigna insurance and they confirmed ppi was through I group and I have a copy of cigna terms and conditions that backs this up.
3.In paperwork that came back there is a underwritters sheet with all figures on which also lists the ppi and some other info about commission which I have never seen before but understand at the time the mortgage was agreed should have been disclosed? to us.

I believe that there has been an element of fraud here and also not forgetting the ppi?

Any advise would be great.

Thanks for your time..

- - - Updated - - -

Yes the above mortgage was remortgaged.

2003 remortgaged from spml to igroup
2005 remortgageed to Ge money + had secure loan via advantage morgan stanley group in 2007. For £15,500

Late 2008 my wife became ill with depression and I ended up unemployed to take care of her as we had a baby March 08. Ge took us to court but ended with a suspension order. Wich was fine but then we got behind with the secured loan and they then took us to court also and were granted possession of property. Not good but hay how.

So you can probably understand why I would like to claim anything back fro igroup ge money total crooks.

-taff

You were sold a mortgage by a broker who wasn't regulated.

ChrisKH

Hi Guys


I'm looking for some advice on a valid mis-selling claim. Back in 2006 I took out a loan with Forward Trust now part of First Direct and I was sold some payment protection insurance; not a great deal of money - £256.88 all in. I opted for it as I wanted cover for the repayments if I fell sick as I had a chronic illness. No one asked if I had a pre-existing condition nor pointed out it would be useless if I made a claim. That's the easy part.


I made a claim initially to First Direct (as Forward Trust took ownership of this company in 1996) and they have rejected my claim on the basis that they never mis-sold it, but that the company who offered it as part of the loan deal (DFS - the sofa people) sold it, so they had no responsibility.


So my questions are, more legal than anything:-


1) Are First Direct off the hook. Do they not have a duty of care to ensure their products are sold correctly if sold through an agent (i.e. DFS)?


2) Will that liability or responsibility change, given the circumstances of the Susan Plevin case?


Obviously I want to bring a claim against DFS, if the bank are not liable, but if they have put some distance between themselves and the regulator by being the seller of the insurance instead of the bank, I presume I'm stuffed if they reject the claim, which is more than likely, as I have no regulator to fall back on. Short of going to court that is. Shouldn't the regulator be covering 'distance-sold' policies by banks? They wouldn't get away with selling on that basis now, or would have to demonstrate the product was adequately sold by the agent, I'm sure. Do I still have recourse through the regulator?


I know it's a fair amount of time since I paid for the PPI, but I have full documentation and third party evidence of the PPI was even provided by First Direct, who seemed pretty sure in their rejection I had no claim.


Any advice appreciated.


Cheers, Chris

Nasqueron

ChrisKH wrote: »

Hi Guys


I'm looking for some advice on a valid mis-selling claim. Back in 2006 I took out a loan with Forward Trust now part of First Direct and I was sold some payment protection insurance; not a great deal of money - £256.88 all in. I opted for it as I wanted cover for the repayments if I fell sick as I had a chronic illness. No one asked if I had a pre-existing condition nor pointed out it would be useless if I made a claim. That's the easy part.

Unfortunately PPI is not an "advised" sale i.e. one where things like this are discussed with you - it was up to you to read the terms and conditions and see if they would exclude you (that said, it may have paid out anyway just not for that specific condition unless the condition was so severe it caused other problems) - if you chose to take it, it wasn't miss-sold

ChrisKH wrote: »

I made a claim initially to First Direct (as Forward Trust took ownership of this company in 1996) and they have rejected my claim on the basis that they never mis-sold it, but that the company who offered it as part of the loan deal (DFS - the sofa people) sold it, so they had no responsibility.

All fine, their staff didn't sell it, they just did the finance, so no responsibility for a miss-sale

ChrisKH wrote: »

So my questions are, more legal than anything:-


1) Are First Direct off the hook. Do they not have a duty of care to ensure their products are sold correctly if sold through an agent (i.e. DFS)?

They are not liable for miss-selling if they didn't sell you the finance no. They'd have no way of knowing what the shop staff were saying. Again it was not an advised sale, the shop staff were not trained for that

ChrisKH wrote: »

2) Will that liability or responsibility change, given the circumstances of the Susan Plevin case?

No, Plevin is nothing at all to do with that. Plevin is about commission not being declared.

ChrisKH wrote: »

Obviously I want to bring a claim against DFS, if the bank are not liable, but if they have put some distance between themselves and the regulator by being the seller of the insurance instead of the bank, I presume I'm stuffed if they reject the claim, which is more than likely, as I have no regulator to fall back on.

As the sale was in 2006 they would have been regulated I believe?

ChrisKH wrote: »

Short of going to court that is. Shouldn't the regulator be covering 'distance-sold' policies by banks? They wouldn't get away with selling on that basis now, or would have to demonstrate the product was adequately sold by the agent, I'm sure. Do I still have recourse through the regulator?

The FOS covers all finance sales and has done since 2005. It doesn't change the fact that the liability for a miss-sale is with the person who sold it to you, not the people who did the finance

ChrisKH wrote: »

I know it's a fair amount of time since I paid for the PPI, but I have full documentation and third party evidence of the PPI was even provided by First Direct, who seemed pretty sure in their rejection I had no claim.


Any advice appreciated.


Cheers, Chris

Again, it is miss-sale that is the problem, not the issue of the people doing the finance.

Complain to DFS. As it's after 2005 they have to look at it and you can refer to the FOS after

dunstonh

Precisioncars wrote: »

Any legal advise would be great on this story.

My wife and I took out a mortgage via Igroup broker Rainbow homeloans ltd in 2003.
this had a ppi attached £3000.
I wrote to Igroup/ge with a response of there not liable the broker is. I understand this is correct. Any way I left it a few months and asked Iroup for loan agreement and paperwork from said mortgage (i already had a copy of the agreement). Have now had the info from Igroup. Findings are not good??
1. The complete original loan agreement was all hand written in relevant boxes not typed as is the original copy i had originally. Now the page of the agreemnt with a the figures on which they have sent to me has been typed but the other parts are hand written as they should be. Find this odd as all the figures are different incuding ppi cost also date has been changed and looks as if the signatures have been forged??
on this I would say that Igroup sold the ppi to us as they changed all the figures from original signed agreement.
2. Also on some paperwork they have sent us states in the terms that broker fee and ppi would be paid direct to broker. In the paperwork there is proof that this did not happen The PPi was paid direct to Igroup financial services. I have also contacted cigna insurance and they confirmed ppi was through I group and I have a copy of cigna terms and conditions that backs this up.
3.In paperwork that came back there is a underwritters sheet with all figures on which also lists the ppi and some other info about commission which I have never seen before but understand at the time the mortgage was agreed should have been disclosed? to us.

I believe that there has been an element of fraud here and also not forgetting the ppi?

Any advise would be great.

Thanks for your time..

- - - Updated - - -

Yes the above mortgage was remortgaged.

2003 remortgaged from spml to igroup
2005 remortgageed to Ge money + had secure loan via advantage morgan stanley group in 2007. For £15,500

Late 2008 my wife became ill with depression and I ended up unemployed to take care of her as we had a baby March 08. Ge took us to court but ended with a suspension order. Wich was fine but then we got behind with the secured loan and they then took us to court also and were granted possession of property. Not good but hay how.

So you can probably understand why I would like to claim anything back fro igroup ge money total crooks.

Yes, you were mis-sold by the broker. Doesnt appear to be any fraud though. MPPI should always be monthly premium MPPI. Not single premium. However, as you bought before regulation stated and Rainbow homeloans no longer exist. So, it is game over for you.

slings

I had a car loan in 2002 and repaid it approx. 2 yrs later. I was sold it as they showed me my monthly payments dropped once they added it into the loan (dumb I know). I don't have any paperwork or details of who the loan company was but was £6000 loan. Does anyone know if I can claim. I also had various store cars over a 4 year span approx. 1994-1998 - I have no idea if ppi was on them. again I don't have any paperwork or definite dates.


thanks for any help

Nasqueron

slings wrote: »

I had a car loan in 2002 and repaid it approx. 2 yrs later. I was sold it as they showed me my monthly payments dropped once they added it into the loan (dumb I know). I don't have any paperwork or details of who the loan company was but was £6000 loan. Does anyone know if I can claim. I also had various store cars over a 4 year span approx. 1994-1998 - I have no idea if ppi was on them. again I don't have any paperwork or definite dates.


thanks for any help

Anything pre-2005 can be dismissed by the seller (the car dealership) as pre-regulation.

Store cards can but you'd need to prove you had PPI on them and were miss-sold, if you don't have any paperwork left I'd probably let it go as the store and underwriter almost certainly will have deleted the records from accounts closed 19 years ago