ppi claim against the abbey national building society

cjguy71

i had both a mortgage and loan with the abbey in the 1990s,as i have no paperwork and or timescale or specific dates i am wondering if i would be able to claim against the aforementioned company?
would i be able to claim on the grounds that both policies were at the same address?
i would appreciate any help on the matter,i know its a long shot but is it worth a try?
regards chris guy

dunstonh

i am wondering if i would be able to claim against the aforementioned company?

You are allowed to make a complaint as you see fit.

would i be able to claim on the grounds that both policies were at the same address?

That is not grounds for complaint.

Look at the PPI article on this site. That will give examples of some potential mis-sale reasons.

cjguy71

Thank you...am wondering because of the length of time which has passed could i claim?
And with the abbey being taken over by santander would i be able to claim?
As for the address i meant could the policies be traced using this?
Or would my claim just be dismissed?
Thanks again for your help in this matter
Regards chris guy

magpiecottage

It sounds like you have no evidence that a policy ever existed.

dunstonh

Thank you...am wondering because of the length of time which has passed could i claim?

Your complaint will be harder due to the timescale. Records do get destroyed over time. Some firms hold on to records longer than others but the odds get longer the further back you go. Plus, mortgage PPI already has a low success rate on complaints. So, you wouldnt get your hopes up.

And with the abbey being taken over by santander would i be able to claim?

You send your complaint to Santander.

As for the address i meant could the policies be traced using this?

You would provide them current and past addresses, date of birth and anything that helps locate the case. Anything to aid your complaint.

cjguy71

I have found out the dates when i bought and sold the house i owned using the abbey national mortgage which had ppi as they would nt lend me the money unless i had it,due to my low wage.i also had a loan with them for home improvements which also had ppi on it.they said that ppi would make the application run smoother,again mis selling in my opinion

dunstonh

cjguy71 wrote: »

I have found out the dates when i bought and sold the house i owned using the abbey national mortgage which had ppi as they would nt lend me the money unless i had it,due to my low wage.i also had a loan with them for home improvements which also had ppi on it.they said that ppi would make the application run smoother,again mis selling in my opinion

Not necessarily. Many lenders in the mid 90s insisted on MPPI to get the mortgage deal. That was (and still is) allowed.

However, even if you were told incorrectly, what evidence do you have to support your allegation that was said?

cjguy71

Probably none.but a negative attitude helps nobody and without being funny mortgage payment protection can be mis sold and can be reclaimed

safestored4

In your previous post you said that you were required to have PPI because of your low wage. If this is correct it seems that you needed it so why do you think it was mis-sold?

dunstonh

cjguy71 wrote: »

Probably none.but a negative attitude helps nobody and without being funny mortgage payment protection can be mis sold and can be reclaimed

It can be mis-sold. However, the figures show most MPPI complaints are rejected and the regulator found less issues with MPPI compared to other types.

It isnt about having a negative attitude. knowing the reasons why something works or fails helps understand where the issues are.

What tends to happen to unprovable allegations, which do not get auto payout, is that they get rejected on that point as no evidence supports that allegation. They then look at suitability of the policy and whether you had a financial need and were eligible. That is where many complaint end up succeeding with loan/credit card PPI but MPPI still passes as suitable in that areas most of the time.

Placida

safestored4 wrote: »

In your previous post you said that you were required to have PPI because of your low wage. If this is correct it seems that you needed it so why do you think it was mis-sold?

FOS don't agree

"...... the balancing act I undertake here is a finely balanced one between what HSBC has said and what Mrs Y has said. I am assisted in this by what HSBC’s sales application record (the only sale-specific document that HSBC has been able to produce) tells me about Mrs Y’s circumstances at the time. She was on a very low wage indeed; so low that for a person in her circumstances affordability would have been of the essence. So even though she only had the benefit of statutory sick pay in the event of being unable to work through sickness and had no other fallbacks, and even though the policy does appear to have provided a reasonable benefit, I find that for someone in Mrs Y’s very particular circumstances, it would not have been affordable."

Complaint upheld