BOS response - Section 78 does not apply

Mr_Baldman

Hi,

I sent off template 1 (request for policy T&Cs) to Bank of Scotland so i could check my agreement on an old credit card that i took out in 2005, that i have since cancelled.

They sent a response saying that...

Section 78 only applies during the lifetime of the agreement. As the account has been closed, there is no longer a regulated agreement between ourselves.

They also included a cheque for £1, as a refund for the £1 cheque that i sent with my initial letter.

What do i do here? i see all sorts of different responses over the forums about filling out a FOS form online??? Or are BOS correct here?

This process really is quite daunting and confusing. I have moments where i feel like using one of these PPI companies to do it, to save on the hassle of it all. :eek:

Any guidance appreciated.

dunstonh

What do i do here? i see all sorts of different responses over the forums about filling out a FOS form online??? Or are BOS correct here?

The BoS are correct. S78 of the CCA only applies to debts outstanding. Not those repaid.

I have moments where i feel like using one of these PPI companies to do it, to save on the hassle of it all.

They still have to ask you the reasons you have for complaint. Unless you use one of the many dodgy ones that puts in fraudulent complaints on your behalf.

If you have grounds for complaint then make the complaint. You dont need the agreement. That is just wasting time and money.

What are your reasons for complaint about how your PPI was sold?

Mr_Baldman

dunstonh wrote: »

If you have grounds for complaint then make the complaint. You dont need the agreement. That is just wasting time and money.

What are your reasons for complaint about how your PPI was sold?

I am just following the procedure on this website - "step 1, check your policy"

all i am asking for is a copy of that policy so i can check it to see if i have grounds for complaint.

isnt that how i am supposed to start?

dunstonh

I am just following the procedure on this website - "step 1, check your policy"

The article on this website is flawed in a few areas as you are now realising.

all i am asking for is a copy of that policy so i can check it to see if i have grounds for complaint.

A copy of the agreement wont show you if you have grounds for complaint or not. There is nothing wrong with having PPI. All an agreement will do is show whether you have it or not. The whole issue over PPI is whether it was mis-sold to you or not. Not whether you have it or not.

So, why do you think you were mis-sold?

Mr_Baldman

dunstonh wrote: »

So, why do you think you were mis-sold?

"because i was too dumb to know what i was signing up for"

"because the nasty man at the bank made me do it"

how do they sound?

MoneyMagic01273

dunstonh wrote: »

The article on this website is flawed in a few areas as you are now realising.



A copy of the agreement wont show you if you have grounds for complaint or not. There is nothing wrong with having PPI. All an agreement will do is show whether you have it or not. The whole issue over PPI is whether it was mis-sold to you or not. Not whether you have it or not.

So, why do you think you were mis-sold?

So... just to be clear - all the claims that are going through to re-claim PPI... you believe that every one of those claimants genuinely woke up one day and suddenly realised they were mis-sold - and that every one of the claims that were met by Banks was as a result of a 100% proven case of miss-selling?

You believe the banks are fully investigating each and every claim in absolute n'th degree detail before paying claims and that - if a customer just wants to "chance it" - there is no way the bank will meet their claim?

Do I understand you correctly?

In summary you should only make a PPI claim if you genuinely believe you were mis-sold and you should not just "chance it" and follow the claim process in the hope that a bank may just make you an offer of some of your money back?

If that is what you are proposing then I'm :rotfl:'ing

I've seen you respond to a few of these PPI posts and each time you press for people to explain to you "why" they think they were mis-sold PPI. Clearly you have a little bit of a bee in your bonnet based on your (probably correct) belief that a large number of claims are band-wagon claims based on no known mis-selling but just as an attempt to get some cash back.

If that is the case, I really think you should get over it. Of course that is what is happening and who cares. The fact is, people can lodge a claim with the vaguest "complaint" about the selling of PPI, which often a bank is unable to disprove and will pay out. And personally, I say good luck to them.

Lets get real here. I doubt these guys are asking you or me for an opinion on whether they really were mis-sold. They are asking about the nuts and bolts process that they need to follow so that they can lodge a complaint with a bank and potentially get some money back.

dunstonh

"because i was too dumb to know what i was signing up for"

"because the nasty man at the bank made me do it"

how do they sound?

Can you prove either of those?
They are very weak reasons. No factual basis to them that can be proved.

So... just to be clear - all the claims that are going through to re-claim PPI... you believe that every one of those claimants genuinely woke up one day and suddenly realised they were mis-sold - and that every one of the claims that were met by Banks was as a result of a 100% proven case of miss-selling?

No. However, you have to have a reason for complaint. You cant just ask for the premiums back because you never claimed on the policy. Most successful complaints fall under three categories. 1) factual/provable complaint reason 2) firm doesnt have enough to support their side of the story 3) auto payout by the firm.

In summary you should only make a PPI claim if you genuinely believe you were mis-sold and you should not just "chance it" and follow the claim process in the hope that a bank may just make you an offer of some of your money back?

Are you suggesting that people commit fraud?

I've seen you respond to a few of these PPI posts and each time you press for people to explain to you "why" they think they were mis-sold PPI. Clearly you have a little bit of a bee in your bonnet based on your (probably correct) belief that a large number of claims are band-wagon claims based on no known mis-selling but just as an attempt to get some cash back.

If having morals means I have a bee in my bonnet then so be it.

If that is the case, I really think you should get over it.

But what about the small local firms and self employed individuals that are getting fraudulent complaints and suffering financially because of it? The banks may be large faceless corporations and some may decide to put in fraudulent complaints but is that fair on the small business people who have done no wrong but suffering fraudulent complaints?

Lets get real here. I doubt these guys are asking you or me for an opinion on whether they really were mis-sold. They are asking about the nuts and bolts process that they need to follow so that they can lodge a complaint with a bank and potentially get some money back.

The fact you were thanked by the OP suggests you are probably right and that they are fishing for information to make an opportunistic complaint.

MoneyMagic01273

OK, you carry on as you will. I'll continue to chuckle at you in your self-appointed role as MSE "PPI Judge" (but obviously commending you also, for your high moral standards and holier-than-thou approach to life)

As I said, those thousands of people succesfully "committing fraud" have my best wishes. I doubt many of these people care about picking up a little bad-karma just because they genuinely don't know or can't remember whether they asked for, wanted or needed PPI.

The PPI situation is what it is. The banks created it and rightly or wrongly the situation has become a free-for-all.

And if I had paid PPI I would probably chance a claim too without caring a jot about someone on a forum who might think I was being a bit naughty.

MoneyMagic01273

dunstonh wrote: »

Are you suggesting that people commit fraud?

No, I'm suggesting it is possible for someone to have been mis-sold something without actually being sure if their situation is classified as mis-selling.

And in those cases, I believe it is justified for someone to make an equiry - phrased as a "complaint" if that is what the process requires - to have the bank determine that, if they so choose.

[Deleted User]

Mr_Baldman wrote: »

"because the nasty man at the bank made me do it"

Put this on your Ombudsman Questionnaire and you are bound to win redress!:D

ALIBOBSY

You have to give dunston some credit here he does try to help people on these forums, BUT I do feek his answers come across from his perspective as someone who works within the financial sector (and lets face it we all make judgements based on our personal experience and knowledge).
That for me like moneyineptitude says comes across a bit as siding with the banks, BUT I also know he is looking at things from a position he thinks the ombudsman may take if it gets that far.

TBH as far as I am concerned the whole PPI issue is based on the fact that the system was basically exploited and abused with widespread miss selling on a systematic deliberate basis at ALL banks/companies.

So they brought it on themselves if some of those customers are pushing the miss sale banner to reclaim. Whats good for the goose and all that.

I would say to anyone with/or had PPI on a loan or credit card to bang in a questionaire as many banks are just paying up. Obviously the stronger you position- the more of the miss sale reasons apply the better, but its definately worth a punt.

Ali x