GE Money ppi rebuff

s-frame

Hello,
i have just received back a letter from GE Money, stating my claim has been rejected due to it being barred under the limitation act 1980.:eek:

They also state that they where not members of the GISC.

The claim was in relation to a loan taken out in March 2004 where i paid a protected payment premium of £681.14 on a loan of £5000.

Is this right or should i go to the Ombudsman service.

Brought a similar claim against Direct Line and received £1503.00 back from them so its worth a try. :j

amersall

Give FOS a call and ask if it is worth going down the insurer route with this.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/contact/index.html

forresflower

Hi there
I got exactly the same letter from GE money today. I had started my initial complaint with them some months ago by filling in the form on this site and they said that I didn't have PPI with them and if I did it must have been with a different company but very strangely they were able to suggest who the company might be. I called them and told them I had all my paperwork and it showed that it was GE money that my PPI policy was with and I had statements showing it along with my monthly repayments. I sent them copies and they admitted they just hadn't looked at my account and sent a standard reply. Why didn't they just say from the start that they couldn't look at it because they weren't members of GISC? Also I am confused about the time barred thing. I repaid the loan within the last six years so why is my claim time barred?

Cheers.

roonaldo

s-frame wrote: »

Hello,
i have just received back a letter from GE Money, stating my claim has been rejected due to it being barred under the limitation act 1980.:eek:

They also state that they where not members of the GISC.

A lot of firms are doing this, not the banks as they members, however a lot of sub prime lenders and brokers were not members, which means they are not under FOS jurisdiction. You need to contact the Finance and Leasing Association.

Is this right or should i go to the Ombudsman service.

You cant as they are correct, GE are not under FOS juridction for sales pre ICOB, so they cant help you.

Brought a similar claim against Direct Line and received £1503.00 back from them so its worth a try. :j

Direct Line are not GE, and are probably under FOS jurisdiction.

roonaldo

forresflower wrote: »

Also I am confused about the time barred thing. I repaid the loan within the last six years so why is my claim time barred?
s.

because the time barr rules are you must complain within 6 years of the sale, or 3 after knowing of the event. So i guess you paid it off over 3 years ago. only FOS should be time barring though, but firms are arguing it. what are your complaint points?

dont cofuse the 6 year thing with firms' record keeping, its unrelated.

Grin74

Had exactly the same from GE. Original loan from Purple Loans. Does anyone have the contact for the underwriters? Have contacted FOS and they say must go through the FLA. If a policy was mis-sold, it was mis-sold, end of. Someone must be responsible. To say they didn't 'sign up' to be regulated is a disgrace.

dunstonh

They also state that they where not members of the GISC.

Thats the killer.

Is this right or should i go to the Ombudsman service.

You dont have access to the FOS. FOS covers FSA regulated firms (at point of sale) or those that had a previous regulator/body that went on to be FSA regulated. GISC being the key one for these.

If a policy was mis-sold, it was mis-sold, end of.

The PPI issue is largely an FSA thing and not a legal issue. So, within the law, it almost certainly wasnt mis-sold and if the firm was not FSA regulated or did not break any rules of an earlier regulator/body then it was not mis-sold.

To say they didn't 'sign up' to be regulated is a disgrace.

Regulation didnt start until 2005. They had to be regulated after that date. Not before.

bodoni

I received a letter today from FOS regarding my complaint about GE Money which has been going on now for close to a year. To cut a long story short, FOS have responded:
"Having looked into the case in more detail, I am sorry to say that we are unable to investigate the complaint about GE Money. This is because the event took place before the sale of insurances policies by this business became covered by our jurisdiction".
The letter goes on further saying that they are now approaching Pinnacle Insurance Plc who were the underwriters of the PPI to see if they are willing to take responsibility for the sale/s.

So at the moment it's a case of waiting for Pinnacle to decide if they will pick up the tab - frankly, not holding out much hope on this.

Grin74

Thanks for the info/advice guys. Not giving up, it will just take considerably longer. I will contact the FLA and Pinnacle and also write back to GE. I've had advice from another forum, saying that GE will be liable under the Consumer Credit Act, see below:
there is NO ime limit on PPI reclaims! and they ARE responsible under the CCA section 56: Consumer Credit Act Section 56. refers... — (1) In this Act “antecedent negotiations ” means any negotiations with the debtor or hirer— (a) conducted by the creditor or owner in relation to the making of any regulated agreement, or (b) conducted by a credit-broker in relation to goods sold or proposed to be sold by the credit-broker to the creditor before forming the subject-matter of a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement within section 12(a), or (c) conducted by the supplier in relation to a transaction financed or proposed to be financed by a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement and “negotiator ” means the person by whom negotiations are so conducted with the debtor or hirer.

Worth a shot.

magpiecottage

Grin74 wrote: »

I've had advice from another forum, saying that GE will be liable under the Consumer Credit Act

This is unlikely to work for a couple of reasons.

The first is that an insurance policy is not "goods" but a service.

The second is that because the matter is outside FOS jurisdiction, you would have to go through a court and persuade it that the PPI had been missold. As the courts are taking a different view to FOS on this, you are likely to lose on that point.

Bearing in mind that you would have to pay a court fee (which you forfeit if you do not win) and almost certainly have to travel to a court local to the respondent at your own expense, you will probably end up throwing good money after bad.

forresflower

roonaldo wrote: »

because the time barr rules are you must complain within 6 years of the sale, or 3 after knowing of the event. So i guess you paid it off over 3 years ago. only FOS should be time barring though, but firms are arguing it. what are your complaint points?

dont cofuse the 6 year thing with firms' record keeping, its unrelated.

My complaint points are that I have a chronic health condition which was manageable at the time of the loan as I was working but I was always upfront about when taking out loans or mortgage and so I wouldnt have been able to claim on the ppi. I had good sickness and redundancy cover as did my partner and that the salesperson didn't explain that the cover was optional or that we could go buy elsewhere. I am mad at them for giving me the initial brush off without even checking their files. I wonder how many others they do this to who have a better grounds for complaining than me?

Cheers.