Told I agreed to PPI without being sold it

gissie

I have just received a letter from Nationwide with regards to PPI on my credit card from 2000 until 2005. Although I was paying PPI on my balance, I was told that as I had applied by post on an application form and had ticked the box asking for PPI, that it was not mis-sold by them and therefore they were not upholding my claim.
I had tried to cancel my policy by phone with them when I had the card about 10 years ago and was told that would not be possible. I have no actual dates of when I did this though.

At the time of applying for the card I was living with my parents, with a full time job with sickness benefits and a redundancy package as well as savings. I also had no other financial obligations had I lost my job.

They stated that had I lost my job I still could have made a successful claim and despite the redundancy package and savings I could've put the money towards helping with other financial needs.

Can I pursue this further, or are they right that I have no case as I asked for the policy in my application? I do not remember receiving any advice from them as to the suitability of the PPI package for my needs.

[Deleted User]

gissie wrote: »

Can I pursue this further, or are they right that I have no case as I asked for the policy in my application?

If this is their "full and final response" then their letter should have detailed your right to take your case to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-loan-insurance#step4

gissie

Thank you for replying. They did say I can do that and enclosed a leaflet, but I was wondering if I had a case to put forward, or were they justified in saying that if I chose to take it out then I'm not entitled to say it was mis-sold?

[Deleted User]

gissie wrote: »

I was wondering if I had a case to put forward, or were they justified in saying that if I chose to take it out then I'm not entitled to say it was mis-sold?

You could argue that the PPI provided a significant overlap of cover which you already had. However, if you did all of the application by post then this will be classed as a "non-advised" sale.
As I said earlier, you can certainly ask the FOS to take your case, but you can expect a long wait for them to uphold (or reject!) your complaint.

dunstonh

They stated that had I lost my job I still could have made a successful claim and despite the redundancy package and savings I could've put the money towards helping with other financial needs.

They are correct. Redundancy package can be ignored as that can change and it has no impact on the ability to claim on the policy. Sickness pay is one for advice and not DIY. If the insurance pays directly to the debt then it can still pay out even if you are on 100% sick pay. On advised cases that could easily be classed as a mis-sale as advice is about matching your needs. However, on non-advised cases it is up to you what you buy.

[Deleted User]

dunstonh wrote: »

Redundancy package can be ignored as that can change and it has no impact on the ability to claim on the policy.

I've seen posters on here complaining that, when claiming on their PPI policy, the insurer takes their redundancy payment into account before making any payments. Is it not the case that no PPI payouts are made until the claimant is actually in receipt Of Jobseeker's Allowance?

dunstonh

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I've seen posters on here complaining that, when claiming on their PPI policy, the insurer takes their redundancy payment into account before making any payments. Is it not the case that no PPI payouts are made until the claimant is actually in receipt Of Jobseeker's Allowance?

I have seen those posts to but it is an error on their part by not understanding their redundancy payment structure.

PPI will not take redundancy pay into account. The only payments that are taken into account is payment in lieu of notice (or garden leave). That is because they are effectively a continuing wage up to a certain date and you are not unemployed until that date has passed. Many firms will pay payment in lieu of notice as a lump sum and may add it to the redundancy lump sum. Hence the confusion they have.

Jobseekers also takes payment in lieu/garden leave into account as well and it wont start until the termination date.

magpiecottage

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Is it not the case that no PPI payouts are made until the claimant is actually in receipt Of Jobseeker's Allowance?

The qualification is the end of the period to which the employee was contractually entitled to payment. So if you were entitled to three months' notice then you would be entitled to payment until the last day of work (possibly plus any unused holiday) or three months from the date on which notice was given - whichever expired later.

That would normally coincide with when entitlement to JSA began.