Don't think I'll be able to claim for LPI

mad_dr

Right...

I've been doing further research over the past week or so and have been on the phone to the Lloyds Loan information team (and have to say that they've been extremely helpful and cooperative). I've managed to uncover 4 loans (1 standalone loan in 2000 that was paid off early and 1 other loan in 2005 that was then consolidated in 2006 and 2007 before being paid off in full in 2008).

All four loans had PPI on them:
Here are the pre-interest figures:
Borrow + PPI
£10,000 + £1332
£7,500 + £668
£12,261 + £2193
£13,612 + £3625

However, as loans 3 and 4 were consolidations of loan 2, I didn't actually borrow all of the figures on the left or pay all of the PPIs on the right.

They were able to tell me that I received rebates on PPI on loans 2, 3 and 4 so the rebate amounts respectively were:
£0.00
£321.58
£912.31
£2,227.04

Then obviously there's interest on top of all those numbers just to make things really confusing... They confirmed that these were all single premium front loaded policies.

I can show Lloyds that I've been in continuous employment from the same employer for the past 14 years and that I've never been at risk from needing to use the PPI but I don't have evidence that I ever told them this at the time of taking out the loans.

Also - I'm 100% certain that they would have done the proper paperwork so I'm sure my signatures are all over everything, saying that they've been upfront with me and have explained my options etc...

So, before I put in a claim, I guess my questions are:
1. Is the Single premium factor, in itself, grounds for a complaint? IE is it a case of me writing to them saying "look, you folks know as well as I do that single premium is dodgy and has been banned. Therefore, pay up please and we'll forget this ever happened" (or words to that effect) or do I need MORE than just the fact that it was single premium to justify a complaint? Wouldn't EVERY Lloyds PPI customer be successful in their claims (which we know not to be the case) if the single premium factor was sufficient grounds for a claim?
2. I honestly cannot recall what was discussed or pointed out to me in the meetings about these loans so I presume that I have to consider any hope of arguing that they didn't advise me that I could buy PPI elsewhere or that I felt pressured into buying it, out of the window? IE they'd just reject as heresay (and fair enough if they did)?
3. A couple of times, the info people have told me to call the claims line but I'm wondering if they're just saying that to get me to claim, hoping that I'd be ill-prepared and likely to be rejected? I wouldn't expect the info team to be savvy in the judgement-making process of the claims team?
4. Given that I paid off the loans early, and as I received rebates (as above), I guess that the total 'owed' to me if my claims were successful, is limited to the total PPI amount (plus interest) that was originally owed by me to the bank, minus the rebate amount?

Thanks again for the help and advice!

[Deleted User]

mad_dr wrote: »

I can show Lloyds that I've been in continuous employment from the same employer for the past 14 years and that I've never been at risk from needing to use the PPI but I don't have evidence that I ever told them this at the time of taking out the loans.

More to the point, in 2000 you would only have been in that employment for two years. You couldn't have guaranteed you would stay in continuous employment and, even 12 years on, you still can't.

Use the front-loaded reason as the focus of your complaint or you'll be looking at a rejection.

vonny12

I made a complaint by phone and completeing a questionnaire about ppi based on these reasons; i was never told or explained to about ppi as the adviser was too busy trying to sell me a loan, and i was never informed about ppi, it was added without my knowledge. I believe i were mis-sold ppi on loan account and i want the premiums refunded with contractual and statutory interst. the loan was a consoliation loan ppi should not be sold on these refinancing loans due to the disproportionale rebate on early settlement. I recieved a phone call from the bank out the blue when i was busy with my kids ask about my complaint and i said it was never explained to me and ppi was added without my knowledge i did say it was on the questionnaire. I later got a letter from llodys tsb are refusing to pay me back my ppi based on these two reasons;
policy features and limitations- were the policy benefits and exclusions explained to you clearly. the documentation that you were provided with both at the point of sale and after purchasing your policy, such as the summary of the policy and policy booklet, fully explained the benefits and limitations of this policy. I am also of the opinion that where it was practical the features of the policy were discussed at the point of sale.
Having considered all the available evidence including the sale process and documentation, i have come to the conclusion that the feature of the policy were adequately presented to you.
Consent to cover- relating to complaint 2
The consumer credit agreement shows that we required additional consent in the form of a signature to confirm you wanted a ppi policy to be added to your loan. I am persuaded that this required a verbal explanation ensuring that you were made aware of what you were purchasing.
it can therefore be concluded that you did knowingly consent to the addition of a ppi policy to your loan. in light of my findings, i feel that our adviser acted fairly and reasonably throughout the sale. i believe that the information provided at the time of sale was fair presentation of the features of the policy and explained the policy exclusions and the total cost of the insurance. i am also of the opinion that it was clear, fair and not misleading therefore allowing you to make a fully informed choice. my review has not highlighted any failings with the sale that would lead me to believe your decision to purchase the ppi policy would have changed.
llody tsb as given me 28 days to responsed to the letter i only have two weeks know and they said that i can not contact FOS until 6 months can anyone help me as i don,t what to say in the letter.

mad_dr

Hi Vonny.

As I understand it, although the FOS stipulates that you should only refer your case to them after a certain number of avenues have been pursued by you with your PPI seller, the bank itself isn't able to forbid you from contacting the FOS at the point that your options with them have been exhausted.

It seems that it's worth finding out whether the response you've received from the bank is their "Final decision" as opposed to just one in a series of communications with you. Check your letter to see if they've specified that and - if so - feel free to refer to the FOS.

However, in terms of your specific reasons, it might be worth searching the forums or starting a new thread for your personal case as it's separate to mine.

One of the things that's clear from this forum and others is that - despite the MSE 'reasons for miss-selling' of PPI include lots of unprovable things - in reality banks tend to immediately reject claims like "the bank didn't tell me it was optional", "I wouldn't have made a claim because I'm in full-time employment with great sick pay", etc. They reject these on the basis of it being an unprovable statement from the complainant so an easy way for them to tell you to get lost.

The most commonly upheld complaint about miss-selling is on the basis of "front loaded single premium" PPIs. That's where they take the figure you want to borrow and us it to calculate how much they want to charge you for the PPI, then tack that figure onto the amount you want to borrow and then calculate the interest on top of both of those figures and split the total across the term of your loan. This is a very expensive way to pay for PPI but isn't spelled out to you that you end up paying well over the odds for it.

However, what I'm trying to find out and am struggling to do so is whether the fact that PPI was front loaded and single premium (and therefore very expensive compared to the cost of the PPI itself) is grounds enough for a complaint or whether it can only be used to strengthen an policy that was already miss sold in some other, provable way.

Good luck with your claim!

vonny12

if my loan was £4200.00 and my LPI £1200.13 the total repay £5400.13 does this mean that it is a front loaded and single premium

mad_dr

If you were then charged interest on that whole amount, then yes - it certainly sounds like it.

vonny12

it states on the loan agreement that i will be charged a fixed rate of interest on the total loan of 1.38% per month, annual percentage rate 17.9%

mad_dr

17.9% APR - that's nuts! I thought that my loans at 8.7%, 9.2%, etc were steep! Probably best to start a new thread about your claim so that I'm able to get assistance for my problems on this thread from the helpful folks on this board.

Good luck!

[Deleted User]

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

So you complain on the basis that this was single premium front-loaded PPI.
This is the most upheld complaint reason at FOS.
Good luck...

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

The single premium (not "policy") is what you need to emphasise. All other concerns are secondary.

amersall wrote: »

The Single Premium PPI full cost and unfair rebates of this PPI would not have been explained to you at the point of sale to make an informed decision, had you known the full facts of this PPI you would not have taken it.

Job done!.

How many times do you want to hear this, OP?

mad_dr

While it's clear that front loaded single premium stuff is bad and has been banned, none of those comments you quoted indicate that no other factors need to be mentioned in order to claim a miss sale. Moreover, as yet I've found no evidence or confirmation that by itself it constitutes miss selling and is (by itself) grounds for a refund.

I'm surprised that anyone reports rejection from complaints to Lloyds TSB: as I understand it, prior to 2009 ALL PPI from Lloyds would have been this type of policy so I'm surprised that Lloyds isn't saving themselves lots of money and time in the long run and refunding us all automatically.

I'll submit my claim tomorrow with the policy numbers and will ask for a refund purely on the basis of it being front loaded single premium. (Hopefully they won't point out that everyone's loan illustrations clearly told us exactly what it would end up costing.)

If I'm successful I'll post back here with confirmation that anyone whose PPI was of this type can claim purely on that basis, despite the documentation they were given and what they signed up for.