PPI failure

[Deleted User]

hirobmay wrote: »

I don't know if I had PPI

You told us this a year ago.

hirobmay wrote: »

They have evidence of the account, my understanding of the ruling puts emphasis on them proving their innocence as they've been guilty in many cases. I feel they can dig deeper.

If you've sent them a SAR (as suggested to you a year ago) and that returned no evidence of PPI then I suggest you accept this as there is not going to be any "deeper digging".

As the accuser, it is you who have the burden of proof, not the Bank. You have no proof.

Why are you continuing with this? It's a totally futile exercise…

Brokerwise

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Well, it's only an FSA recommendation to destroy after six years, but I do suspect the Banks apply it rather more stringently than they might have done had the PPI scandal not occurred.

I thought that they did not specify a timescale as such and left it rather ambiguously in the hands of the firm who keep the records as I am sure I had this argument with FOS a couple of years ago. Data protection (section 5 off the top of my head) is also as ambiguous on the subject along the lines of as 'long is reasonable or necessary'

hirobmay

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

If you've sent them a SAR (as suggested to you a year ago) and that returned no evidence of PPI then I suggest you accept this as there is not going to be any "deeper digging".

I have not sent them a SAR. Maybe I should.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

As the accuser, it is you who have the burden of proof, not the Bank. You have no proof.

I'm confused by conflicting information. Again, i quote Mike Dailly from the MoneyBox program. 'I think what you need to do is make a formal complaint the them to say that they should be looking to piece together what they can do to work out if your due a refund,' whereas you say it is I that should have the burden of proof? That to me is conflicting information, So who's correct.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Why are you continuing with this? It's a totally futile exercise…

Again, due to conflicting infomation. I appreciate your help with this.

dunstonh

I'm confused by conflicting information. Again, i quote Mike Dailly from the MoneyBox program. 'I think what you need to do is make a formal complaint the them to say that they should be looking to piece together what they can do to work out if your due a refund,' whereas you say it is I that should have the burden of proof? That to me is conflicting information, So who's correct.

It depends on the reasons for complaint. Some reasons require little or no evidence. e.g. your circumstances at the time may show you were not eligible. That doesnt require proof. However, if the complaint is one of the weaker reasons, such as "he told me this" or "i wasnt told that" then they usually require evidence to succeed. Most people cant provide evidence of those sorts of things so the complaint then falls back onto whether it was suitable or not.

UK law does require the person making the allegation to provide the proof. The FOS are a bit more consumer friendly than the law and doesnt require proof in all areas. However, allegations do normally need support of evidence. At least enough to suggest what you are saying is likely. If the firm has nothing to support your allegation and you have nothing to support your allegation then that particular point is usually rejected. It may succeed on another point though.

councillorkevin

Hello everyone
Long time since I accessed this site other that read the weekly posts. Claimed against Nationwide BS on PPI MSE template (rejected) went to Ombudsman who took a year and turned it down, appealed and turned down by reviewer. They say my word against NBS. What should I do next it's nearly £1000 which I could do with just now. Have I blown all my chances or have I still got some rights left. Private Company, CCJ what? Don't have a great deal of time thats the problem

dunstonh

Claimed against Nationwide BS on PPI MSE template (rejected) went to Ombudsman who took a year and turned it down, appealed and turned down by reviewer.

What PPi product? loan, credit card or mortgage?

They say my word against NBS.

That actually fits in nicely with this thread and shows what happens when there is a lack of evidence.

What should I do next it's nearly £1000 which I could do with just now.

Its game over effectively. You could go to court but the PPI issue is not really a legal one. Its a regulator created issue. Plus, you run the risk of losing in court and suffering costs (albeit no more than a couple of hundred pounds). Most people that have tried court (and there are not many) have lost.

Have I blown all my chances or have I still got some rights left.

Its effectively game over for you.

Private Company, CCJ what?

A claims company cant help you
1 - they use the same free of charge complaints process
2 - they use the same or similar templates
3 - your complaint is handled by the same staff and the same ombudsman

Have you considered that you were not mis-sold? nationwide reject you, an adjudicator reject you and the ombudsman rejected you.

[Deleted User]

hirobmay wrote: »

Iyou say it is I that should have the burden of proof? That to me is conflicting information, So who's correct.

The Bank told you a year ago that you never paid PPI, not only do you not have any proof that you did-you don't even know yourself if you did!

If you post any more about this, I won't respond. A year on from the start of this thread you are wasting everyone's time (including your own) with this.

Why didn't you send them a SAR a year ago as advised?

roonaldo

ive seen many complaints "why was I not sold a PPI policy?" and also people asking the firm to prove that they were never sold a PPI, which is a bit like tesco trying to prove they never sold mr x a pint a milk. pathetic.

magpiecottage

hirobmay wrote: »

Again, i quote Mike Dailly from the MoneyBox program. 'I think what you need to do is make a formal complaint the them to say that they should be looking to piece together what they can do to work out if your due a refund,' whereas you say it is I that should have the burden of proof? That to me is conflicting information, So who's correct.

Again, due to conflicting infomation. I appreciate your help with this.

I think you must have got your wires crossed.

If not, you pay me the £1 million that I suggested you owe me on 13 February last year.

I will then pay £100,000 in exchange for you assigning any rights you may have against anybody in respect of any PPI you may have been missold.


Any takers?

antrobus

magpiecottage wrote: »

I think you must have got your wires crossed. ...

Indeed.

[QUOTE=hirobmay;64413844....Again,_i_quote_Mike_Dailly_from_the_MoneyBox_program._'I think what you need to do is make a formal complaint the them to say that they should be looking to piece together what they can do to work out if your due a refund,' ..[/QUOTE]

But HSBC are trying "to piece together what they can". They have written to the OP asking them to provide "documentation confirming the protection held and accompanying > bank > credit card statements confirming the payments made.....blah blah.."