Black Horse PPI Loans

Awilko11

Hi, I hope someone can advise.

Upon checking a historic loan with Black Horse, I see I was mis sold PPI to the tune of £3k. I complained through the MSE guidelines in May 2011 and received a letter back from BH in September 2011 with the following key points -

1. The interviewer would've considered my circumstances at time of application - true but was told if I did not take PPI then I'd not get the loan.

2. The interviewer would've drawn my attention to the key features and and benefits of the policy and that I had signed the credit agreement - true, I knew about the PPI but was FORCED into accepting PPI or no loan

3. The complaint is not eligible for consideration by Financial Ombudsman as they cannot consider complaints regarding policies that were sold by BH between 1st December 2001 and 31st March 2003 and from the 14th January 2005.

Judging the points above can anyone confirm if I have a case to reply to Black Horse for a PPI claim as I feel that the dates rule out the Ombudsman.

Many thanks.

[Deleted User]

Awilko11 wrote: »

Judging the points above can anyone confirm if I have a case to reply to Black Horse for a PPI claim as I feel that the dates rule out the Ombudsman.

Leaving aside the Ombudsman for a moment;

Your complaint was a very weak "hearsay" one in which you make verbal accusations which cannot be proven

What evidence do you have to show you were "forced" to take the PPI?

As for the Ombudsman, I would fully expect FOS to side with the Bank in the circumstances you have detailed.

Sorry.

Awilko11

Thank you for your reply but what other outcomes are there of mis selling PPI if indeed a forceful approach is not one.

I agree with you on the FOS part of the response.

Many thanks.

DrSqueeze

Blackhorse use a lot of "would have" statements in their complaint replies, so what it comes down to is whether they actually did.

And indeed whether there are other reasons why the PPI wasn't actually suitable for you, or was unnecessary.

( I had a very similar reply to one of my complaints, challenged it on the grounds that things they say "would have" happened didn't - but if they had then I would not have ened up with PPI )

[Deleted User]

DrSqueeze wrote: »

And indeed whether there are other reasons why the PPI wasn't actually suitable for you, or was unnecessary

This is normally the key to a successful complaint, indeed quite a number of people I'd wager have had their complaints upheld on entirely different grounds than that which they've complained about. Unfortunately, it's up to the Bank to check for these other reasons and some seem to be better (or fairer) than others in this regard.

But I still have to say that "hearsay" complaints are the weakest and most easily rejected.

[Deleted User]

Awilko11 wrote: »

Thank you for your reply but what other outcomes are there of mis selling PPI if indeed a forceful approach is not one.

Your complaint is not the issue, it certainly is mis-selling if the advisor told you that you must take the PPI if you wanted the loan to be approved. The problem is that, as the accuser, the burden of proof is on you and you have no such proof. The Bank only has to defend itself by stating they are satisfied that sales procedures in force at the time of the sale wouldn't have allowed it.

To be successful, you needed verifiable complaint reasons such as being sold a policy you could never have claimed on because you were retired, had a pre-existing medical condition or were self employed etc.