I've had PPI, Got the form sent to me from HSBC

Mr_Incredible

krisdorey wrote: »

Have they also suggested you just be truthful?
There is no "trickery", you answer the questions true to your situation, not anyone elses.

They don't need to thats a given

dunstonh

This is a money saving site. Not a how to commit fraud site.

Using false reasons or made up reasons to try and improve your chances of success can backfire. Indeed, you often see this with claims companies who frequently lie on their template letters. In areas where there is no evidence and a balance of probability decision is required, then often the most credible party wins. If you have been caught telling lies, then you lose that credibility and you would lose the balance of probability decision.

A complaint handler at a bank or whoever does not expect perfect recollection. Indeed, they are put more on guard by those that do claim such things. So, putting down "cannot remember" can actually help your chances of success and not hinder it.

Mr_Incredible

dunstonh wrote: »

This is a money saving site. Not a how to commit fraud site.

Using false reasons or made up reasons to try and improve your chances of success can backfire. Indeed, you often see this with claims companies who frequently lie on their template letters. In areas where there is no evidence and a balance of probability decision is required, then often the most credible party wins. If you have been caught telling lies, then you lose that credibility and you would lose the balance of probability decision.

A complaint handler at a bank or whoever does not expect perfect recollection. Indeed, they are put more on guard by those that do claim such things. So, putting down "cannot remember" can actually help your chances of success and not hinder it.

Thats an interesting and qualified slant on things I hadn't previousely realised, thank you.

Appropos your first paragraph, please be under no persuasion by other posters, I am not looking to tell any lies whatsoever. I'm just cautious of questions that appear to invoke answers that could be used against you, and that is one such in my opinion. There may be others and its those sorts of things I'd like to cover.

:beer:

McKneff

Mr_Incredible wrote: »

yeah thanks big guy

'big guy' :rotfl:that's a first for me lol...............

People are giving you good advice, you argue because it isnt what you want to hear, if everyone agreed with you, you would be as happy as a sand boy.

Mr_Incredible

McKneff wrote: »

'big guy' :rotfl:that's a first for me lol...............

People are giving you good advice, you argue because it isnt what you want to hear, if everyone agreed with you, you would be as happy as a sand boy.

I've had some good advice also via PM, thanks anyway

Mr_Incredible

So I had a conversation with HSBC as I was filling in the form this evening. They are already processing my claim and actually when I probed a bit they say that submission of my form would be useful to help them compile details but actually, with or without the form they will still process my claim.

Failure to submit the standard forms won't hold up their processing.

In A way this seems strange but clearly they have accepted that I feel I was missold purely from my verbal communication which is good.

It makes sense that I fill in. the form anyway and while I frankly cant remember everything that occured I do remember the important aspects such asd I was employed and would have recieved sick pay, they made out that the ppi was a requirement and without it the request for finance would be less likely a success and other aspects such as financial support I could have got from family, girlfreind etc in the event of. I figure these can only help my case.

Thanks to those that have been helpful on here

dunstonh

In A way this seems strange but clearly they have accepted that I feel I was missold purely from my verbal communication which is good.

They will accept that you felt that way and they will look into it to see if there is any evidence to support that. If they find no evidence then they will usually reject. That is unless you get lucky with an auto payout decision.

It does help to have a more solid reason in your complaints list which is why we frequently say as such on these forums. If you only have an unprovable allegation then you are more reliant on luck than anything else.

Mr_Incredible

dunstonh wrote: »

They will accept that you felt that way and they will look into it to see if there is any evidence to support that. If they find no evidence then they will usually reject. That is unless you get lucky with an auto payout decision.

It does help to have a more solid reason in your complaints list which is why we frequently say as such on these forums. If you only have an unprovable allegation then you are more reliant on luck than anything else.

As another poster above said, given that many of these policies originated long ago it is sometimes difficult to remember everything, I do remember enough to be firm in my conviction that I was miss sold, having viewed them MSE check criteria. Unless you can produce another witness I don't suppose anything isn't absolute, buy I would have thought the backdrop to their decision is influenced by what they think would happen in acivil case, where courts decisions are made on balance of probabilities.

Lets face it, I wouldn't be the first claiment either, far from it, we shall see, but it seems best to complete and send back my form and fill in what I amy certain of

Mr_Incredible

It does help to have a more solid reason in your complaints list which is why we frequently say as such on these forums. If you only have an unprovable allegation then you are more reliant on luck than anything else.[/QUOTE]
What would you consider a solid reason ?

dunstonh

buy I would have thought the backdrop to their decision is influenced by what they think would happen in acivil case, where courts decisions are made on balance of probabilities.

The lenders have been very successful in the courts with PPI complaints going down that route. The problem is usually lack of evidence of wrong doing (the onus is on the complainant to prove wrongdoing) and that the whole PPI issue is largely down to the FSA changing its mind on PPI and retrospectively applying its rules. The rules are not laws. So, courts do look at these differently.

Single premium PPI on loans was a good complaint reason until recently. However, the FOS have backed away from that. Possibly as court action has seen lenders win where there has been single premium and the FOS should take court cases into account in its judgements.

Solid reasons are ineligibility for cover. i.e. you could never claim on it as you didnt meet criteria.
No financial need for it (not a common complaint reason - it appears on most claims companies templates but they list everything and most of what they claim is lies). i.e. you had £30,000 in a savings account and no need for insurance. Problem is that if you borrow on a credit card then you are not likely to have savings. Loans are a possibility there though as many people have loans and savings.
Pre-existing medical condition - it has to be a fairly strong medical condition. A back complaint wouldnt be enough as it doesnt prevent cover in all other medical areas but some conditions are severe enough to invalidate the overral medical coverage to a level that makes it pointless to have.
Employer sick pay coverage - tends not to work on mortgage PPI as they usually pay out in addition but some types of PPI will not pay out if there are employer sickness benefits. Where they pay out, it is not a mis-sale but where they would not pay out then it usually is.

There is just a few sold reasons. Things that can not really be argued with as they are factual/provable.