Santander :(

iBoudica

Hi again,

I haven't been here for over 12 months so hello again !!

I successfully reclaimed PPI on a loan with the Co Op and a loan with Tesco and also applied to Santander for PPI that I had been sold with the following letter to which I've just had a negative response:

Dear Sirs,

RE:
1. ALLIANCE AND LEICESTER PERSONAL FINANCE AGREEMENT
(I) / XXXXXXXXXXXxxx
Name: Mrs ***
Date of Birth: 1*/0*/19**
Start Date of Policy: 00/00/2008
Terms: 36 @ £369 (monthly)
Date Satisfied: 00/00/2009

I bought the above plan from you on the 00/00/2008. I now wish to
claim back my premiums plus interest. I contend that this policy was mis-sold for following reason/s.

• I was employed at the time but your staff did not inform me that any change to this could invalidate sections of the policy during its life. I was not asked about any intended charges or informed or warned of their effects on the policy.

• I have had a previous illness or other medical conditions but your staff did not ask me about my medical history. I was not warned that previous conditions would be excluded.

• Your staff stated or led me to believe that taking out a policy was a pre-condition
of applying for a loan.

• Your staff did not offer me a clear choice of the loan with and the loan without
insurance.

• Your staff did not give me an illustration showing the repayments with and without
insurance until after I signed for the insurance.

• Your staff did not fully explain the policy and its exclusions to me.

I also wish to claim back the premiums and interest on the policy SANTANDER / BUDGET CARD / REVOLVING CREDIT UNSECURED LOAN (I) / XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
that I was sold by Cahoot on 00/00/2002 as this meant I had two policies:

2. SANTANDER / BUDGET CARD / REVOLVING CREDIT UNSECURED LOAN
(I) / XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Name: Ms ***
Date of Birth: 1*/0*/19**
Start Date of Policy: 00/00/2002
Terms: 999 @ £66 (monthly)
Date Satisfied: ongoing


I bought the above plan from Cahoot on the 00/00/2002, who I understand subsequently became part of Santander. I also wish to claim back my premiums plus interest. I contend that this policy was mis sold, for the following reason/s.

• I was employed at the time but your staff did not inform me that any change to this could invalidate sections of the policy during its life. I was not asked about any intended charges or informed or warned of their effects on the policy.

• I have had a previous illness or other medical conditions but your staff did not ask me about my medical history. I was not warned that previous conditions would be excluded.

• Your staff stated or led me to believe that taking out a policy was a pre-condition
of applying for a loan.

• Your staff did not offer me a clear choice of the loan with and the loan without
insurance.

• Your staff did not give me an illustration showing the repayments with and without
insurance until after I signed for the insurance.

• Your staff did not fully explain the policy and its exclusions to me.

I now contend that I was mis-sold both of these policies. I claim back all the premiums and interest I have paid in connection with both of these payment protection insurance policies plus statutory interest at 8% (or whatever other rate the courts might order) from the first payment that I made for each of these policies, until the date of your settlement of this claim.

I would like a reply as soon as possible but, in any case, within the eight weeks allowed for responses to complaints by the Financial Services Authority.

Yours faithfully

The second Santander / Budget Card / Revolving Credit Unsecured loan was for £10,000 (I think, it would not have been for a lot more than that) in 2002. There is around £2, 500 left to pay on it even though I've been paying £66.00 per month since 2002 (didn't realise it was still going on until recently).

I've now had a letter from a ‘Senior Customer Resolution Manager’ basically saying that I took the loans out over the internet therefore no one ‘advised’ me, he has reviewed the paperwork and T’s & C’s that I would have been sent at the time and is satisfied that I was given all the information so basically he’s not upholding my complaint and I should take it to the FOS.

He says he’s tried to contact me twice by phone but hasn't managed to (he may have, I never answer my mobile to ‘Unknown’ callers, particularly if they don’t leave a voicemail) but if I have any information he’s missed I can ring him.

I plan to send my complaint to the FOS but is there any weight in what he’s saying? And is there anything I can do about this never ending rolling loan which has cost me so much other than pay it off (which I plan to do soon). I honestly didn't realise it was a loan that would go on forever, the original debt would have been paid back years ago.:mad:

Many thanks

-taff

he does have a point.


Your argument that you didn't know the loan was for 999 months is going to fall a bit flat as well as your point about not knowing you were paying £66 a month to it. How on earth could you forget that?
The only thing you can do is pay it off, you can probably renogotiate terms to do that.


You can refer your complaint to the FOS, but don't expect anything, and you won't be disappointed.
Your case is not a clear cut win, but they may agree to give you redress instead of paying the FOS fee on one of them.

iBoudica

My claim is purely for PPI on the loans I arranged with Cahoot and Alliance and Leicester which were both subsequently bought by Santander.

The man who replied to my letter basically said that as I arranged them via the Internet, I CHOSE PPI

magpiecottage

Did you arrange them via the internet?

-taff

iBoudica wrote: »

I arranged them via the Internet, I CHOSE PPI

Yes, you did.

ponbeam

Virtually all of your points are in relation to a conversation with a staff member and if you applied online you would not have spoken to anyone!!
Whilst it was a good try I cannot see your case winning with the FOS at all and I would imagine The loan company taking the same view.
Well done on what you have gotten back so far but you are wasting your time with this one I feel

magpiecottage

ponbeam wrote: »

Virtually all of your points are in relation to a conversation with a staff member and if you applied online you would not have spoken to anyone!!
Whilst it was a good try I cannot see your case winning with the FOS at all

I disagree

Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 says

"Fraud by false representation

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b)intends, by making the representation—
(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2)A representation is false if—
(a)it is untrue or misleading, and
(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading."

It rather looks as if the OP has committed a criminal offence.

[Deleted User]

magpiecottage wrote: »

It rather looks as if the OP has committed a criminal offence.

He just sent a really crummy template letter which had no bearing on the actual sale of the PPI and is quite aggressively worded to boot.
I doubt he'll be prosecuted for it, but neither will he win any redress.

dunstonh

Agree. It is very easy to view this as a fraudulent complaint and going to the FOS is going to be interesting as they will clearly see that. That said, the FOS is generally very liberal in thinking and tends to feel that people dont tell lies but are mistaken. Problem is that the use of what appears to be a badly worded template letter with either silly reasons for complaint, made up reasons that do not reflect reality and reasons that are not even valid for complaint has done no favours and has lost the OP all credibility.

if I was in the shoes of the lender, I would at least push for it to be treated as a frivolous complaint.

roonaldo

I too noticed that they are internet. Also Cahoot are internet only applications.

There is no sales person!!! This is a frivolous bogus complaint if ever there was one. Ridiculous.

How on earth would you not know you were paying £66 a month

iBoudica

I am shocked and distressed to be labelled a fraud on this forum.

On reflection my letter was badly worded and not entirely appropriately to my case – it was a template I used from this site which several other people also used and recommended at the time.

I should have considered that my loan was arranged via the internet and so I didn’t have direct contact with ‘staff’ but assumed that even internet arranged loans have some human input into them.

However, that would have only meant a minor rewording:

“I was employed at the time but was not informed that any change to this could invalidate sections of the policy during its life. I was not informed of any intended charges or informed or warned of their effects on the policy.

I have had a previous illness and other medical conditions but was not asked about my medical history. I was not warned that previous conditions would be excluded.

I was led to believe that taking out a policy was a pre-condition of applying for a loan.

I was not offered a clear choice of the loan with and the loan without insurance.

I was not given an illustration showing the repayments with and without insurance until after I signed for the insurance.

The policy and its exclusions were not clarified to me”.

So, is the consensus here that LOANS ARRANGED VIA THE INTERNET CAN NEVER HAVE HAD PPI MIS-SOLD ON THEM BECAUSE PEOPLE KNEW WHAT THEY WERE BUYING? Perhaps you should inform the banks of this loophole.

Every case of people having their PPI repaid that I’ve heard of was for loans arranged via the internet.

I am not the fraud here, my loan with Cahoot was fixed at 6% interest, Santander took over and the interest was immediately increased to 15/5% - I queried it at the time but was told there was nothing I could do. Unfortunately I was not in a position to pay off my loan.

I have been paying for PPI which, due to a medical condition, I would not have been able to claim had I become unemployed and unable to repay my loan.

I won’t be back; I thought this forum was for support of people mistreated by the banks not for finger pointing and point scoring.

Best wishes.