Old ppi on mortgages

dunstonh

oporus wrote: »

You lot are too easy ... far too easy ... very suspicious.

The only suspicious thing here is whether you are for real or a troll. I supect you are troll and the scenario is not real as no-one can be that ignorant in real life and post the way you have and mean it.

oporus

What a bunch of Rottweilers. I dont know whether it is PPi or not, I believe it is. One thing I am clear about - never go anywhere near an IFA - can't trust them an inch.

bye

societys_child

I'm thinking oporus is a mis-spelling of porous - full of holes, doesn't hold water . . . seems to fit.

dunstonh

I dont know whether it is PPi or not, I believe it is.

You have been told mutliple times that it is not
1 - it is before the days of PPI
2 - what you describe is MIG. Not PPI

One thing I am clear about - never go anywhere near an IFA - can't trust them an inch.

on behalf of all IFAs i thank you. No IFA should have such an ignorant and rude person as a client.

However, I always find it funny that people that dont even know what an IFA and/or have never used one, make such comments. Another sign of ignorance. Shame that education system in the UK has got so poor that you see people like this.

-taff

Arrogance, not ignorance, which is worse

magpiecottage

oporus wrote: »

What a bunch of Rottweilers.
I dont know whether it is PPi or not, I believe it is.

As I say, you can believe whatever you like but your belief or lack thereof has no bearing on the truth.

One thing I am clear about - never go anywhere near an IFA - can't trust them an inch.

A rather rash generalisation based on the fact that only one IFA has posted on this thread and neither he nor any others posting (apart from you) has any particular axe to grind.

bye

I suspect the words "riddance" and "good" will spring to their minds.

oporus

You lot are too easy.

I now have no better idea of whether those payments could be reclaimable or not. I have no doubt it would take many letters arguing the case to succeed.

One thing I am now certain of, if I wasn't before, is - stay away from IFAs at all costs. They really aren't worth it.

[Deleted User]

oporus wrote: »

You lot are too easy.

You mean too "easy" to wind up?

Too "easy" to provoke into answering every one of your posts with long detailed and carefully considered explanations of your supposed situation?

Whatever rocks your boat, at least the answers may be of use to others...

magpiecottage

oporus wrote: »

I now have no better idea of whether those payments could be reclaimable or not.

That seems to be because you will not accept views that do not support your case.

I have no doubt it would take many letters arguing the case to succeed.

Actually, if you had a case (which you don't) and it fell within the jurisdiction of FOS (which it doesn't) it would need one letter to the firm and two to FOS.

A court would simply allow a timebar because it was too long ago.

One thing I am now certain of, if I wasn't before, is - stay away from IFAs at all costs. They really aren't worth it.

One of the regular pieces of advice I give to IFAs is that they are supposed to "know your client" and although their regulator does not say so, they should assess the risk of unwarranted complaints. In effect I recommend they underwrite the commercial risk that client represents to them and, if necessary, decline.

You present yourself as a very high risk. If I was an IFA (and as I say, neither I nor any other poster thus far, apart from DunstonH is) I would stay away from you at all costs. You really aren't worth it.