Phone calls from PPI reclaim companies

magpiecottage

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

But are these people all getting payouts? I think not.

Then you think wrong. Not all, perhaps but plenty.

Like the teacher who supposedly did not understand that £27,000 would not be enough to pay off a £40,000 mortgage.

That, I suppose explains why there was a report this week about the poor level of numeracy in the population as a whole.

[Deleted User]

magpiecottage wrote: »

Then you think wrong. Not all, perhaps but plenty.

Like the teacher who supposedly did not understand that £27,000 would not be enough to pay off a £40,000 mortgage..

There are always exceptions to every rule.
I've no doubt "plenty" of people who WERE mis-sold PPI have been refused re-dress by their bank and given up as a result.

timmybear

When I was a boy at junior school (MANY years ago now ), someone shoved another boys coat down a toilet. The head teacher demanded to know who had done it, but no one would admit to it. Therefore she told us that all the boys in the three classes where the incident had taken place would be made to sit in silence in the school hall every morning and afternoon break. We were not allowed outside.

I rememeber thinking how wrong it was that we were all being punished for something that others had done. It was a massive lesson in life, and one l learnt so very early on, that it only takes one or two people to do something, and the rest of us pay.

That is how I see all this PPI business. Yes, I may sound like the banks are being robbed, and do you know why? Because that's exactly how I feel. I don't care what the bankers have and haven't done to the world (well I do really, of course I do, I meant 'I don't care' in context) because two wrongs don't make a right; regardless of who is right and who is wrong, I really don't see how banks -especially in the current mess- can possibly afford to pay back all this alleged miss-sold PPI.

So far, the only people who seem to have a genuine case for claiming back PPI are the people like myself who are self-employed or who, for whatever reason, would never have been able to claim on the PPI.

For everyone else, I don't see how it can be proven either way that PPI was 'miss-sold' or 'added on without the customer knowing'.

And for anyone who knew they had PPI and who would have been eligable to claim on it should they have needed to, I absolutly do not see why they should have a penny back, as what they paid in PPI was money they were expecting to lose anyway, as no one in their right mind would ever hope that they would fall sick or lose their job, irrespective of what loans would be paid for them. It was an insurance policy, that is the nature of the beast. You pay into it in case you need to claim on it. The reality for the customer is that we never want our homes broken into, our cars smashed, or our bolier blowing up, but we pay insurance because it's there if we need it. We all know we'll end up putting more in than we'll ever get back.

What concerns me most of all, is that society is ever more quick to jump onto the latest band-wagon. It saddens me to think people are too dishonest to not take advantage, and too thick to see that what goes around comes around.

dunstonh

But are these people all getting payouts? I think not.

Yes they are. A lot of the providers have auto pay outs. Halifax, for example, are auto refunding everything. Hopefully it is only whilst they have a backlog. Others have a floor limit where they auto payout where the amount is below a certain level.

The other thing to note is that these "opportunists" are claiming their own money back. It's money they've paid for ultra expensive and often useless insurance. You make it sound like the Banks are being robbed, when it was the banks themselves who instituted this method of fleecing the unwary.

The opportunistics are not claiming their own money back. And it doesnt just involve banks. What about the small local advice firms that only put cases in place on advice and not sales. They are getting complaints put to them and when they are rejected (usually because of good audit trail showing factfind, needs analysis and a report) they then get taken to the FOS by the claims company and it still generates a £500 fee even when the FOS reject it.

You see people in this forum seeing to think that it is the insurance that is bad. So, if they have insurance and havent suffered a claim they think they can claim the premiums back.

lxpeanut

dunstonh wrote: »

Yes they are. A lot of the providers have auto pay outs. Halifax, for example, are auto refunding everything. Hopefully it is only whilst they have a backlog. Others have a floor limit where they auto payout where the amount is below a certain level.

LOL if you knew how long I'd been fighting bloody Halifax you'd know they aren't autopaying. They are now paying back for a period where they have been found to have missold as a policy not for all PPI. I knew I had PPI I had it because I was told without it I would not get a loan and was in a desperate situation so had to go along with it. Even if someone does get paid back wrongly they are only getting their own money back.

dunstonh

LOL if you knew how long I'd been fighting bloody Halifax you'd know they aren't autopaying.

They are well known that they are autopaying since the judicial review outcome. If they are investigating your case then it suggests it is an older one or it above a floor limit amount.

[Deleted User]

lxpeanut wrote: »

Even if someone does get paid back wrongly they are only getting their own money back.

Exactly.
I suspect there are far more people failing to get redress at all than there are getting THEIR money back with suspect reason.

[Deleted User]

dunstonh wrote: »

The opportunistics are not claiming their own money back.

I fail to see how you can say this. They are only having their own contributions refunded (albeit with some interest).

dunstonh wrote: »

And it doesnt just involve banks. What about the small local advice firms that only put cases in place on advice and not sales. They are getting complaints put to them and when they are rejected (usually because of good audit trail showing factfind, needs analysis and a report) they then get taken to the FOS by the claims company and it still generates a £500 fee even when the FOS reject it.

This reads like your personal experience and I do have sympathy, but it doesn't detract from, the fact that expensive (and often useless) PPI WAS mis-sold by numerous lending institutions. These institutions gambled that their sharp practices would yield a handsome profit, but it's backfired on them spectacularly.

dunstonh wrote: »

You see people in this forum seeming to think that it is the insurance that is bad. So, if they have insurance and havent suffered a claim they think they can claim the premiums back.

I agree the claims companies are using every imaginable tactic to make someone with even the most tenuous reasons for doing so think they have a claim. I have no regard for these companies and I do blame them for some of the "opportunistic" complaints that are being filed.

dunstonh

I fail to see how you can say this. They are only having their own contributions refunded (albeit with some interest).

They are attempting to get back what they agreed to pay.

This reads like your personal experience and I do have sympathy, but it doesn't detract from, the fact that expensive (and often useless) PPI WAS mis-sold by numerous lending institutions. These institutions gambled that their sharp practices would yield a handsome profit, but it's backfired on them spectacularly.

I have had a fraudulent complaint in the past. However, not on PPI. I know a number of IFAs and mortgage advisers that have suffered with these try-it-ons. Including one that got a complaint from a policeman whose complaint was that he WASNT sold PPI and therefore couldnt claim back compensation.

The important thing is that no-one here is saying there was not mis-selling. Just that the FSA ruling was largely fortuitous for consumers and has allowed the dishonest to get away with making try it on complaints and stand a very good chance of getting money out of it despite not being mis-sold to. Where someone has a genuine complaint they deserve the complaint to be treated fairly.

[Deleted User]

dunstonh wrote: »

I know a number of IFAs and mortgage advisers that have suffered with these try-it-ons. Including one that got a complaint from a policeman whose complaint was that he WASNT sold PPI and therefore couldnt claim back compensation.

That is very funny, actually.:D