RBS being difficult?

-taff

If your partner is a ppi claims assessor for a bank, you could ask them what your chances are of a successful 25 year old complaint.....
And I'm suspicious that you're asking now in order to print out the copy and pass it off as your own.

But then I'm a suspicious kind of person.......

[Deleted User]

sun73 wrote: »

You've done your homework, my partner is a ppi claims assessor for another bank and has confirmed that they are looking at complaints from the mid 1980's.

Banks are duty bound to look at any complaint no matter how old, of course this doesn't mean they uphold them without any documentary evidence.


You've quoted your partner's "confirmation" of inaccurate information in the past;

sun73_on_another_thread wrote: »

Message for Valia; what date did the 2003 PPi policy end? As, if it was after Jan 2005, the FSA has suggested that it can be treated as covered by the newer regulations (my partner is a ppi claims assessor for a bank), so I know this to be accurate.

dunstonh_in_reply_to_the_above_post wrote: »

Absolute rubbish. Your partner works for a bank. They would have been members of GISC. So, they have to consider pre-regulation complaints.

I can also do such "homework":p

[Deleted User]

sun73 wrote: »

There are some honest people around, not masquerading as so called experts.

If you look at the top of the forum you'll see that it's an open forum in which anyone can post. I can't see anywhere that the poster in question claims to be an "expert". She offers advice based on personal experience and general knowledge.
As for "libel", I think you need to look up the definition of that word and learn where it applies.
She is certainly free to be suspicious of your motive for requesting a link to someone else's policy agreement and schedule.

-taff

sun73 wrote: »

I have just read your response to my wife's request. How dare you make libellous accusations, do not judge everyone else by your own standards. There are some honest people around, not masquerading as so called experts. I think you should apologise for your remarks.

I dont believe I will apologise for being suspicious.

I'm not masquerading as an expert at all. I'm offering advice based on over a year of reading advice from other people with more knowledge than me, and from my own experiences.

It's entirely up to whoever reads it to listen to it or not.

-taff

Actually, slightly less than a year....

-taff

Goodbye. A final thought for you. You are also masquerading as something you're not by using your wifes account.

The Oxford English dictionary is al well and good but you are forgetting context. I said i was suspicious, not that your wife was actually going to do this. Suspicion is allowed and not libel.

Please do get your facts straight before you indulge in small minded pettiness. Oh dear, you already have indulged....and flounced off with the final word

[Deleted User]

-taff wrote: »

I said i was suspicious, not that your wife was actually going to do this.

Exactly.
This thread has become very mean minded (in my opinion of course, so not a libellous statement:D).

sun73 wrote: »

I would suspect there are some plants from the banks trying to dissuade people from claiming.

Isn't this libellous (by your own definition)?:p