Who sold the PPI?

Kolokial

Hi again,

As some of you may know I'm helping my mother with some of her debts, and currently we are trying to track a mis-sold PPI.

I have spoken to Cattles Group Ltd who Welcome Finance is associated with somehow, and they've advised me that my mother went to Blue Sky first, and so they packaged the PPI and Loan from Welcome Finance, and so are apparently responsible for reclaiming PPI.

I contacted Blue Sky and sent over the agreement, they responded with a Final Response (apparently for a second time (another company had tried to claim, which we were unaware of)) citing that all their staff are properly trained and would never commit such an act. It was a hefty reply(4 pages), and I wondered the validity after I'd read it.

I'm going to fill in the PPI consumer questionnaire and send it to Welcome Finance and BlueSky. Is this the right thing to do or a waste of time?

jellie

Welcome is a subsidiary of Cattles.

As Welcome didn't sell your PPI, it's a waste of time going to them as they will just refer you back to Blue Sky.

If you've already made a complaint to Blue Sky and you've received their final response (which is sounds as though you have), it's a waste of time completing a questionnaire.

Did Blue Sky tell you in their letter that you now need to refer your complaint to FOS if you want to take it further?

Another company couldn't have submitted a complaint on your mother's behalf without her signing a contract, authorising them to do so.

happy_bunny_2

They are likely fobbing you off.

Ring the FOS to get their opinion on who you should have complained to and if you can refer the rejection to them:
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumer/complaints.htm

Won't take long and they don't bite

Kolokial

Okay, so I called FOS (thanks happy_bunny) and they have opened a case for me, they will be sending me a pack with some information and documents which my mother and I will need to fill in and send back.

Blue Sky did advise me to contact FOS as well.

I don't see how either of them can abstain from responsibility. Blue Sky found the finance (Welcome Finance) and then packaged PPI with it. All the documentation I have however is for Welcome Finance, and no mention of Blue Sky Personal Finance anywhere, yet they are both aware of my mothers details and agreements.

Could someone please explain on what grounds the company that provided the product (PPI) can abstain from responsibility of selling it? (I realise they can, and have argued, that their staff would never do such a thing; but from my understanding their staff didn't make the sale? :eek:

bigadaj

In terms of responsibility then the responsible company should be the one your mother had teh contract with, so who's paperwork did she sign and who did she make payments to.

The company would have to show that they explained the terms of the insurance and that it would be applicable. Cases where they would probably fail would be where someone was unemployed or retired, had pre existing medical conditions etc.

The procedure is normally to contact the company. They respond within eight weeks and you can then go to the fos. Where they are denying responsibility then its easier to go straight to fos, and your case sounds a good one as their slopes shouldered approach should put them on the back foot from the regulators point of view.

JuicyJesus

bigadaj wrote: »

In terms of responsibility then the responsible company should be the one your mother had teh contract with, so who's paperwork did she sign and who did she make payments to.

No. For mis-sale complaints, it's the seller's responsibility. If Blue Sky were the ones that sold the policy any responsibility for any mis-sale complaints is with them, regardless of who the policy is with or who payments were being made to.

The company would have to show that they explained the terms of the insurance and that it would be applicable. Cases where they would probably fail would be where someone was unemployed or retired, had pre existing medical conditions etc.

Unemployed and retired are issues, as someone in either category could never claim, but pre-existing conditions are not unless you actually have any and the condition(s) would have excluded you from claiming.

The procedure is normally to contact the company. They respond within eight weeks and you can then go to the fos. Where they are denying responsibility then its easier to go straight to fos, and your case sounds a good one as their slopes shouldered approach should put them on the back foot from the regulators point of view.

If you go straight to FOS without first complaining to the firm, before a final response has been issued or before 8 weeks since the date of complaint (whichever is earlier) all they will do is forward any complaint to the firm for them to consider. They won't actually do anything themselves until the firm has issued a final response or has taken over eight weeks to handle the complaint.

Kolokial

Thanks bigadaj and JuicyJesus. I might have confused things.

The paperwork we have here is for Welcome Finance, but I'll be making an SAR to Blue Sky to see what they have also. Payments are being made to Welcome Finance via Atlas collections (Something to do with Welcome Finance no longer actually lending/trading).

My mother has never been unemployed, and isn't retired yet.

JuicyJesus

Kolokial wrote: »

Thanks bigadaj and JuicyJesus. I might have confused things.

The paperwork we have here is for Welcome Finance, but I'll be making an SAR to Blue Sky to see what they have also. Payments are being made to Welcome Finance via Atlas collections (Something to do with Welcome Finance no longer actually lending/trading).

My mother has never been unemployed, and isn't retired yet.

Something needs to be established here. Did you apply for the loan and the PPI through Welcome Finance or Blue Sky? If the latter, complain to them; if the former you need to go through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme as as you say Welcome went bust.

Kolokial

my mother went to Blue Sky first

According to my mother (double checked, just to be sure) she applied for the loan through Blue Sky, but Welcome Finance provided the funds and Blue Sky provided the PPI.

(Please keep in mind that this all took place in 2008.)

I've complained to Blue Sky who issued a Final Response. I'm now in contact with the FOS as Blue Sky are fobbing me off.

So instead of FOS, I should go to FSCS?

JuicyJesus

Kolokial wrote: »

According to my mother (double checked, just to be sure) she applied for the loan through Blue Sky, but Welcome Finance provided the funds and Blue Sky provided the PPI.

(Please keep in mind that this all took place in 2008.)

I've complained to Blue Sky who issued a Final Response. I'm now in contact with the FOS as Blue Sky are fobbing me off.

So instead of FOS, I should go to FSCS?

Blue Sky. They sold the policy. Keep going to the FOS as Blue Sky are still trading and are responsible for the sale. Either way, expect a wait of up to two years.

societys_child

Kolokial wrote: »

Could someone please explain on what grounds the company that provided the product (PPI) can abstain from responsibility of selling it? (I realise they can, and have argued, that their staff would never do such a thing; but from my understanding their staff didn't make the sale? :eek:

There is nothing wrong with selling PPI. You only make a complaint if it was somehow mis-sold. You've not said why you believe it was?