Barclays Insurance in Dublin - do they have all the data still in existence?

skemp1

Oh thanks, thats what i wanted to know.

I took my morgan stanley card out in 2000 i dont think it was online as i dont think they did it that way then. I never asked for it or knew about it so would goldfish and barclaycard just carry it on then? How would they know?

[Deleted User]

skemp1 wrote: »

I just wonder why it was refused on the 26/01/13? Especially as the barclayloan was upheld.

Well as I said above.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

The rejection was because it was an online application. These are termed "non-advised" and so cannot be mis-sold because they are actively bought not sold. The only exception is if a pre-ticked box for PPI was employed as part of the application. Obviously, this wasn't the case with Please Advise as the Bank rejected his complaint.

and here's the original post about it:

Pleaseadvise wrote: »

Barclaycard got my form on the 4th of January and today have replied not upholding the complaint. They are satisfied the online application 'was sufficient to provide you with all of the information necessary to inform you of the terms and conditions of the policy.'

Maybe the ombudsman will not be so satisfied as Barclaycard are?

I'm afraid the Ombudsman will side with the Bank in these circumstances. Please Advise effectively MIS-BOUGHT rather than was mis-sold.

skemp1 wrote: »

I took my morgan stanley card out in 2000 i dont think it was online as i dont think they did it that way then. I never asked for it or knew about it so would goldfish and barclaycard just carry it on then? How would they know?

It's more likely that you've just forgotten that that you agreed to the PPI thirteen years ago. Despite what claims companies say, PPI was not just randomly applied without the permission or knowledge of the customer.

Pleaseadvise

I got the answer from Barclaycard after I posted in this thread. It looks as though my signature on the post changed later when I updated it.

In fact, I am a woman - the PPI was on my husband's job but I've done the form filling. He says he didn't tick for PPI on the credit card application but Barclaycard say differently.

Barclays agreed that the loan PPI was missold, though, and repaid surprisingly fast.


The thread moved on while I had the page open!

[Deleted User]

Pleaseadvise wrote: »

He says he didn't tick for PPI on the credit card application but Barclaycard say differently.

I'm afraid it's a forgone conclusion that FOS will side with the Bank in this circumstance. The Bank will provide FOS with evidence that there was no pre-ticked box for PPI, whereas your husband can only provide his memory of NOT ticking the box. In addition, the Bank will say that your husband will have had the opportunity to question the PPI every month because it appears on every credit card statement when the account has a balance.

Your post about your rejection appears on an entirely different thread, by the way.

skemp1

We will see I guess,

Are you saying then that there were no people that had ppi added without their request?

I have had 2 complaints upheld with Barclays for my barclayloan because they added it without informing me or taking any of my circumstances into account.

The other one was Overdraft ppi that they have admitted adding without my knowledge when I signed up for an additions account. I had £50k at the time (as you know) with Barclays in savings and investments.

Because I was an investment customer an still have a substantial amount with them I am being contacted by a specialist customer relations manager to try and "rebuild" trust in them as they do not want to loose my custom. They have admitted with my overdrat ppi that it was added without my knowledge or consent.

[Deleted User]

skemp1 wrote: »

I have had 2 complaints upheld with Barclays for my barclayloan because they added it without informing me or taking any of my circumstances into account.

Banks don't actually state why they uphold complaints. Hence why people (often mistakenly) think their complaint is upheld based on the reasons they gave.
Banks can auto-payout without investigation or find errors not mentioned in the complaint. You'll never be told.
It's the £50K you had which swung your complaints in your favour IMHO.

skemp1 wrote: »

The other one was Overdraft ppi that they have admitted adding without my knowledge

Really?
They "admitted" adding it without your knowledge? I sincerely doubt your redress letter mentioned any liability at all.

skemp1

These are the things I do not understand:

1) If Morgan Stanley miss-sold me ppi then this changed to Goldfish and then Barclaycard who is really liable for it? How will they find proof as the Morgan Stanley card was taken out in 2000.

2) If Barclays have upheld my claims twice for 2 ppi products could they really not uphold my claim?

skemp1

The re-dress letter did not admit liability but the letters from the customer service manager did and was full of appologies about it.

[Deleted User]

skemp1 wrote: »

If Barclays have upheld my claims twice for 2 ppi products could they really not uphold my claim?

Every complaint is dealt with on it's own merits (or lack of them). If you can prove you also had £50k with Morgan Stanley in 2000 then you will probably win redress. Otherwise, your complaint is weak and the Bank will probably say they have no records going back thirteen years
Banks typically keep records for only six years in line with FSA guidelines.

[Deleted User]

skemp1 wrote: »

The re-dress letter did not admit liability

Surprise, surprise!
The other letters, as you state, are just trying to keep your custom and say what they think you want to hear.
Trust me, it's the £50K they are interested in.:D