PPI Rejected by FOS as over time limit

pmurray

Hi,

I am looking for some help in claiming back PPI. I am claiming on behalf of my Brother, who is shocking when in comes to paperwork, anyway quick background:

4 claims submitted, all of which had PPI charged. Llyods, Bank Of Scotland, & MBNA.

Reason for reclaiming on them all was that my brother has been self employed for over 20 years AND had another personal insurance in place should he have needed it. (He now works off shore and over the past two years spent a lot of time working abroad)

All claims were rejected by the individual banks with the standard letter issued referring us to the FOS, however this happened in August 2012......I did not get the letters from him until recently and set about referring it to FOS in August 2013, they have subsequently rejected them as they are over the 6 months timescale, when I advised them he had been working overseas they felt that this was not a good enough reason.

My question is, does anyone have any suggestions on what we do now? :mad:

-taff

That's it I'm afraid.

dotdash79

Have you applied against the decision to time bar?

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/six-month-time-limit.htm gives an outline as what might be accepted.

misschicken

I think they're unlikely to overturn their decision. It'd have to be trapped on a desert island rather than working overseas I'd imagine. But, no harm in trying, ever.

magpiecottage

However does he manage to run a business if he is that disorganised?

It would only have taken a few minutes to contact FOS.

Don't let your blood pressure go up because of your brother's folly.

Insider101

Echo the general sentiment here I am afraid.

The respective companies have all complied with their bit, issuing the decision letter giving the six month FOS rights. FOS for their part enforce the six months pretty strictly. Normally the would only consider waiving it if there is a very good reason why he COULD NOT have been expected to refer it within the allocated six months. A difficulty which might have been in the way (but is not insurmountable) is not the same thing.

Was he not at home at any point between August 2012 and February 2013 when the FOS rights would expire? Was he not aware that the responses were due around this date (it should have given an idea on time frame in the acknowledgement letters)? Did he not have arrangements in place for people to open or forward his mail? I would have thought being self employed such things would be essential.

Admittedly I am playing devil's advocate to some extent here, but this is what FOS are going to be thinking. And if you can't persuade me then its pretty unlikely you'll be able to persuade them.

Insider101

To add to the above, though nowadays the proliferation of CMCs promote it as something that should be done speculatively or in the hope of landing a payout, the truth is that making a formal complaint is a fairly serious matter. You are basically accusing someone of misconduct. They may have wanted to contact or question him about if, what would he have done then? Rightly or wrongly to send four (presumably similar) letters off to four banks and then go away and forget about it gives the impression that the complaints have been made on the off chance rather than out of a genuine sense of dissatisfaction.

pmurray

Insider101 wrote: »

To add to the above, though nowadays the proliferation of CMCs promote it as something that should be done speculatively or in the hope of landing a payout, the truth is that making a formal complaint is a fairly serious matter. You are basically accusing someone of misconduct. They may have wanted to contact or question him about if, what would he have done then? Rightly or wrongly to send four (presumably similar) letters off to four banks and then go away and forget about it gives the impression that the complaints have been made on the off chance rather than out of a genuine sense of dissatisfaction.

Insider101 wrote: »

Echo the general sentiment here I am afraid.

I

The respective companies have all complied with their bit, issuing the decision letter giving the six month FOS rights. FOS for their part enforce the six months pretty strictly. Normally the would only consider waiving it if there is a very good reason why he COULD NOT have been expected to refer it within the allocated six months. A difficulty which might have been in the way (but is not insurmountable) is not the same thing.

Was he not at home at any point between August 2012 and February 2013 when the FOS rights would expire? Was he not aware that the responses were due around this date (it should have given an idea on time frame in the acknowledgement letters)? Did he not have arrangements in place for people to open or forward his mail? I would have thought being self employed such things would be essential.

Admittedly I am playing devil's advocate to some extent here, but this is what FOS are going to be thinking. And if you can't persuade me then its pretty unlikely you'll be able to persuade them.

Was only looking for some advice not a lecture!!!!!!

Insider101

pmurray wrote: »

Was only looking for some advice not a lecture!!!!!!

No lecture here just honest views. If your brother has a good answer to the points raised then by all means post it. I'll be the first to tell you if he has a good case.

Do bear in mind that being self employed is not automatically grounds for an uphold. It depends on the conditions for claiming and whether he was adequately made aware of them. Even bearing that in mind if he can't answer the points I've made convincingly its unlikely FOS will take it further.

Don't get me wrong it is not my intention to take sides. But these are the issues you are likely to come across.

I could simply be sycophantic and tell you that you have a cast iron case. But that would not benefit either you or your brother in the long run.

-taff

pmurray wrote: »

Was only looking for some advice not a lecture!!!!!!

If someone else searches for answers to a similar question, these answers help them too

quaybab

I can tell you that Lloyds banking group (inc BOS) tell some customers they will not deal with
complaints by email so if your brother has told them of an alternative correspondence address
to use and they did not, it could form part of your appeal for progressing the PPI complaint.

The decision whether to progress the case out of time should have come from an adjudicator
(case work) and they will have told you have the right for an ombudsman to decide on it.
If not, put in a complaint about the FOS - http://www.fos.org.uk/publications/factsheets/complaints-about-our-service.pdf