PPI FAQs discussion thread

dunstonh

karla_1985 wrote: »

Me and my husband took out a £2000 loan in 2004 and were offered ppi and were told we would be covered if my partner (now husband) lost his job. Unfortunately a year or so later that happened! We tried to claim on the ppi but they said we couldn't do that. Were we miss sold the ppi? Am asking because we knew we had it. Thanks

Nothing in your post suggests any mis-sale. What would be your reasons for complaint?

Why did they reject the claim on the policy?

TARN

Black horse morgages are a part of Lloyd's bank. Or we're should i say. I'm kinda lost of what to do. Lloyd's agree with me that they used to sell morgages with them etc. I just cannot find any information about Anything.


Thank,you for the link but I'm sure it's not them.

There must be someone else out there who may of had a morgage with them etc.

Thank you

-taff

Unless you're complaining about your mortgage, why do you need Black Horse Mortgages info? Were they the ones that sold you PPI? Because if they aren't, you are wasting your time.

Momiji_doll

Hi, I am looking for help and advice on reclaiming PPI on a couple of loans that I took out online.

I received a letter from Canada Square Operations, formerly known as Egg Banking plc, regarding reclaiming PPI for a couple of loans I took out online many years ago. I have no paperwork for these loans and have no idea how much these loans were for. All I really know is the loans were paid off in full.

I am unsure on how to answer section E on the complaint form. I did not talk to anyone regarding my loans and do not remember any information that was given to me when I applied for the loans as everything was done online. Any advice on how to answer section E would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks.

dancj

Hi. I'm trying to work our where I stand and the FAQ seems to contradict itself.

When we took our mortgage we were told that we had to take out a PPI.

In the FAQ it says:
"I was told to buy mortgage PPI, was it mis-sold?
Yes, but mortgage PPI wasn't as commonly mis-sold, so it's less of an issue."

But then it says
"Mortgage lenders can legitimately say that having PPI is a condition of allowing you a mortgage - but they aren't allowed to say it must be theirs."

These two see to contradict each other - and everywhere else I can finding the web states outright that mortgage lenders can't insist on PPI.

Can anyone explain this apparent contradiction?

Thanks

Dan

-taff

Mortgage ppi is different to normal credit card or loan PPI. Its usually sold properly [monthly, not in one lump sum]
There's no contradiction. If it's a condition of the mortgage or a condition of advice from a broker, then it's a condition.

dancj

But that contradicts the "was it mis-sold? Yes" part, because what you're saying is it probably wasn't mis-sold.

If the crucial thing is whether or not it was paid in one go or monthly I'll have to look at my paperwork to check that.

Thanks.

[Deleted User]

dancj wrote: »

But that contradicts the "was it mis-sold? Yes" part, because what you're saying is it probably wasn't mis-sold.

There is no contradiction.

In the first instance the MPPI is mis-sold because the complainant is told that the insurance is compulsory when it isn't.

In the second instance the MPPI is not mis-sold because it is a condition of the mortgage that you take out insurance and the complainant is fully informed of that.


Most MPPI complaints do fail, I'm afraid, mostly because they don't exhibit many of the failings of loan and credit card PPI. As you say, an important thing to check is whether it was set up properly as a seperate monthly premium.

dancj

Sorry, I'm missing something here. If the PPPI is a condition of the mortgage then surely that makes it compulsory for that mortgage?

dunstonh

dancj wrote: »

Sorry, I'm missing something here. If the PPPI is a condition of the mortgage then surely that makes it compulsory for that mortgage?

A lender is allowed to insist on insurance as a condition of the mortgage. There is no wrong doing there. You don't see it much nowadays but in the past most lenders insisted on life assurance. Now its mainly buildings insurance. At various points some lenders have insisted on their MPPI as part of a cross subsidised packaged deal. None of that is wrong.

Where it is wrong is where you are told you need it when you do not. i.e. a lie.

It should also be noted that the allegation of mis-sale where you say you were told you needed it (where it wasnt actually needed) is one of the weakest complaint reasons going. Typically, you have no evidence to support that allegation and typically the lender won't either.