PPI - First National Home Loans / GE Money / Pinnacle

InTheDrops

Hello all,

I was hoping for some advice on a claim that I am making against the above:


Background: Personal loan taken with First National Home Finance in 2003, paid off in 2006.

Recently wrote to to First National requesting details & copies of agreements under CCA.

Reply received (very quickly!) from GE Money containing everything requested stating that any questions regarding the insurance should be directed to Cardiff Pinnacle, who were the underwriters.

As GE Money have taken over First National, should I now address my correspondence to GE or continue to address First National and expect response from GE? Not sure if this makes any difference but am expecting a "We didn't sell it to you so it's not our problem" style response from GE if I begin to address my complaint to them directly.

The PPI sections of the application form and agreements were not completed or signed but this was added to the loan in a lump sum.

I sent a completed PPI questionnaire with copies of the agreements (addressed to First National again) and a supporting letter summarizing my complaint.

I received (again, very quickly) a response from GE Money quoting my current mortgage account number (not referenced in my complaint) stating that no PPI was sold, I should contact the mortgage broker & that is their final response.

Clearly they have responded on the wrong account in this instance so I have responded in kind to advise them of their error.

Given some transfer from First National to GE and the loan being underwritten by Pinnacle, my question to the forum is:

Who should I be contacting to resolve my complaint? First National (as per the loan agreement), GE (who have been responding to my letters to First National) or Cardiff Pinnacle?I will continue to update with progress but would appreciate some guidance on the above.

Thanks in advance!

magpiecottage

The question is who actually sold you the PPI?

That is who you must complain to.

InTheDrops

The agreement was with First National however the original application form appears to have the header of "Direct Home Loans" in Torquay so may have gone through a broker but I don't accurately remember to be honest...

roonaldo

Then Direct Home Loans are the seller of the PPI.
GE are the lender, not seller. You cant say they mis-sold you something when they werent involved in the sale.

magpiecottage

That appears to be Assured Direct Homeloans Limited of
8 St. Pauls Road
Torquay
Devon
TQ1 3QF.

InTheDrops

magpiecottage wrote: »

That appears to be Assured Direct Homeloans Limited

Well, the address matches but the broker named on the application form is Direct Homeloans Southern; either way I'm assuming that they were an non-regulated broker at the time.

I'm a little confused as to who would be liable due to the point in which the 'sale' that the PPI was added.

An except from the Broker's application form with the PPI section left blank:
i21.photobucket.com/albums/b258/IanGoodwin/photo-2.jpg

Then the First National Agreement contained
i21.photobucket.com/albums/b258/IanGoodwin/photo.jpg

and then added a sum to the loan as follows
i21.photobucket.com/albums/b258/IanGoodwin/photo-1.jpg

At the time I assumed this was mandatory...

Is adding the PPI to the principal in this manner in line with the poor practices people have been complaining about?

Thanks again

magpiecottage

The "where the customer has opted" bit shows it was optional.

The single premium added to the loan will be upheld by FOS if it has jurisdiction.

When was the loan taken out?

InTheDrops

It was in '03, hence the expectation that nothing will come from this due to the broker not being regulated at that time.

What I've got fingers crossed for is that it's either so blatant that the broker gives in (wishful thinking hey?) or it's deemed that the lender added the ppi at the point of agreement.

InTheDrops

Had a quick call with the FOS today who advised:

GE Money will not be liable
Broker was not regulated
Contact Pinnacle to progress as they were/are regulated so should bear some liability for the policy

If there is no acceptance of liability get back in touch with the FOS

I haven't seen any positive outcomes from claims against Pinnacle as the underwriters on the forum though, does anyone know of any?

Thanks

magpiecottage

Your complaint against the insurer is that they breached the GISC code by accepting business from an intermediary that did not subscribe to the code.

But for the breach that sale, which you now realise was a missale because it was a single premium added to the loan, would not have occurred.

WombleSW20_2

Magpiecottage - can you explain why you've concluded that a GISC registered insurer would be in breach of the code if it dealt with an non-member intermediary ? I've looked through the code and can't find this anywhere? thx