The six month period has elapsed (from their response)

Will_H

Hi all,

Mint rejected my PPI claim out of hand, with a letter dated 03 September 2012, but the delivery of this letter was delayed by several months, since I did not return to the UK. (I was travelling).

I did not realise that I only had 6 months to raise the matter with the Financial Ombudsman Service. Obviously the time from the date of that letter is now 9 months.

Are there any circumstances under which this 6 month period can be extended? Or has Mint now won by default?
Are there any arguments I can make to the FOS that would allow them to intercede on my behalf?

Many thanks,
Will

dunstonh

I did not realise that I only had 6 months to raise the matter with the Financial Ombudsman Service.

Although the letter does say that one assumes (it is pretty much standard text on rejections).

Are there any circumstances under which this 6 month period can be extended? Or has Mint now won by default?
Are there any arguments I can make to the FOS that would allow them to intercede on my beh

Assuming the 6 month rule is documented on the rejection, you would need to persuade the FOS that you are incapacitated or not in a position to forward the complaint to them for the whole of the 9 month period. Your post indicates you are not in a position to do that as you mention several months (which I take to read less than 6 months).

roonaldo

Six months is six months not nine months. im not sure if being out of the country is a sufficient reason. you can only ask.