My bank lied about my PPI and has now admitted it!

FragG_2

Hi, we were sold a loan from Clydesdale in 2000 for £15,000 over 10 years. At the time we were told no PPI no loan, even though my husband is a civil servant with great sickness benefits. The cost of the PPI was £5770 sold as a single premium policy with interest added.
The loan is now paid off and we started the reclaim process in 2011. The bank denied we ever had PPI and said they had no records etc etc. we did not have any paperwork either just the account no and the total amount paid back, about £33000!
We had to take the case to the Ombudsman and an ajudicater has sided with Clydesdale saying they provided proof of no PPI? We have now asked for the case to be passed to an ombudsman as we now have evidence. I phoned Clydesdale last month and a very helpful advisor found our PPI and sent me a statement showing all the figures, this has been forwarded to the Ombudsman. Surely they will now rule in our favour? any further advice would be great or if you have had a similar experience with a bank. I am just so angry that Clydedale have kept this case going for nearly 2 years!

misschicken

As the PPI has now been found the Ombudsman will obviously 'disagree' with the adjudicator's findings on those grounds. However it now becomes a mis-selling issue and the final decision will still rest on whether the Ombudsman thinks the policy was actually mis-sold so you need to focus on that side of it now. I would also highlight the fact that Clydesdale have dealt very poorly with your complaint. Speak to your adjudicator and make sure you have the opportunity have your say.

dunstonh

Surely they will now rule in our favour?

Your complaint is one thing and whether you had PPI or not is another. Now they have found the PPI, they can review your complaint.

misschicken

Also unless the bank have actually admitted lying about the PPI then I'd move away from that point. It's more likely that they failed to investigate your complaint properly, as the policy was taken out in 2000 the records probably weren't in front of their nose and they made an error - one which should have been rectified far earlier in the process and has wasted everyone's time. While your focus should now be on the mis-selling aspect of the complaint you should also consider this part of the FOS process too and see if you think it applies to you

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/distress-and-inconvenience.htm#2

[Deleted User]

FragG wrote: »

I phoned Clydesdale last month and a very helpful advisor found our PPI and sent me a statement showing all the figures, this has been forwarded to the Ombudsman.

Obviously an error has occurred and the Bank mistakenly told you there was no PPI. No point in recriminations over this, though.

The important thing is to not lose sight of the fact that your complaint now hinges on whether or not it was mis-sold, not that the Bank claimed you had no PPI when you did.

Your mistake was to send your complaint to the Ombudsman without sending a SAR to the Bank. You were certain you paid PPI and the Subject Access Request would have revealed this immediately.

I think it very likely your complaint will be upheld now, however there can be no guarantees. Do note that the process is still likely to take many months.

FragG_2

We did sent a SAR, but they said they could not find the records. The loan was taken out in person with our local branch and it is now obvious that the PPI was not fit for purpose as my husbands job provided 12 months of full sick pay, he is in the police and had been for 16 years at the time of taking the loan. The PPI plus interest has cost us over £8500 on a £15000 loan, we said at the time that it was expensive but were told that it was compulsory to get the loan. The ombudsman have been given all this information already and I don't feel we should have to give the bank lots of time to respond as they have no recollection of us taking the PPI and due to our circumstances it was missold, because no one would pay that much for a policy on an optional basis.

lippy1923

FragG wrote: »

We did sent a SAR, but they said they could not find the records. The loan was taken out in person with our local branch and it is now obvious that the PPI was not fit for purpose as my husbands job provided 12 months of full sick pay, he is in the police and had been for 16 years at the time of taking the loan. The PPI plus interest has cost us over £8500 on a £15000 loan, we said at the time that it was expensive but were told that it was compulsory to get the loan. The ombudsman have been given all this information already and I don't feel we should have to give the bank lots of time to respond as they have no recollection of us taking the PPI and due to our circumstances it was missold, because no one would pay that much for a policy on an optional basis.

Can you prove that it was compulsory? Or is this your word against theirs? These complaints are often very hard to prove, so it's 50/50 if they will uphold your complaint or not.

What are your other reasons for complaint of a mis-sale?

FragG_2

It is our word against theirs, but with secure employment and good sickness benefits this was a very expensive insurance, we would never have taken a single premium PPI, also it only covered 5 years of the 10 loan term. I think Clydesdale would be hard pushed to prove that we wanted this insurance.

lippy1923

I wish you luck with your complaint.

Use the fact your H had a good sickness package as part of your argument, but remember you still openly agreed to taking out the loan, knowing what you would end up paying.

The bank could easily come back saying you did not inform them of your H sickness benefits and sold you the ppi in good faith, which you agreed to. Again this is their word against yours.

misschicken

In terms of giving the bank time to respond that's down to the Ombudsman and will take as long as it takes. There is an additional issue with the SAR though as now the bank has managed to find documentation showing the PPI that means they failed to respond to your SAR in full, which has also had very real consequences with your FOS case. The SAR issue is a matter for the ICO rather than the FOS and doesn't involve compensation for you but you might want to look into making a complaint anyway (if nothing else at least you'll feel like you're doing something - the waiting part is so frustrating with all of this). You can call the ICO for advice on 0303 123 1113.

Fingers crossed for you.

[Deleted User]

FragG wrote: »

I don't feel we should have to give the bank lots of time to respond

It's not the Bank, but the Ombudsman process which will take months. If you actually sent a SAR (and paid £10) but received no details, then this is a different complaint you should make direct to the Bank. ICO involvement would only be necessary if the Bank refused to comply with the SAR rather than failed to actually find your account details.
You might want to consider firing a letter of complaint to the CEO of the Bank.