BC rejection a couple of years ago, is it worth re-trying?

MoodyBlue_2

Hi all

I could do with some advice regarding a Barclaycard rejection from a couple of years ago.

My case is quite complicated so please bear with me while I try to explain what happened...

In hindsight a big mistake... but, as it was my first attempt at a PPI reclaim, I made my original complaint via a claims management company, Claims Advisory Group (truly awful company!).

I completed their application form and, as I wasn't sure how I had originally applied, stated not sure on the form. I also told them that I had phoned midway through the contract to try to cancel PPI but was (stupidly) talked into keeping it by the lady I spoke to at BC.

Anyway, things went quiet for many months and CAG were pretty useless, continually telling me that they hadn't heard back from BC. In the end I contacted BC myself only to be told that they had sent their rejection letter to CAG many weeks earlier, and... that it was an online application (and therefore I had selected PPI myself) and not a postal application as noted by CAG on their complaint literature.

I complained further to BC as I didn't recall ticking boxes and regarding the fact that I had try to cancel, but there response was to send a copy of their application 'back-end' form (not the screens that I had used) showing that PPI had been selected and saying that they had no record of the call; and also that their decision was final. They also mentioned non-assisted application. I didn't progress with the FO at the time.

It's bugged me for a while so I raised a SAR a couple of months back but still no mention of the telephone call, which is very annoying, as now it is just a case of their word against mine.

I've looked back through their screen prints this afternoon and noticed that I was on a (3 month) fixed term contract at the time of application (which wasn't mentioned at the time of the original claim), which in addition to a pre-existing medical condition (which was mentioned in the claim) is yet another reason why the policy was pretty useless.

I suppose ultimately their argument is that I selected the policy, but it irks that it was highly unlikely to be of any use given my circumstances at the time.

So, now (finally!) the questions -
- Were pre-ticked boxes in use on the BC website at the time of my application in March 2005, does anybody know?
- If so, would this be a factor in the complaint / decision process?
- Is it worth trying again given my employment situation at the time?

If anybody has made it this far, thanks for sticking with it!

Any advice greatly appreciated.
MB

-taff

You have already complained once, so you're well out of time to forward your complaint to the FOS. You also cannot complain about the same thing twice.

Forget it, you're out of luck.

MoodyBlue_2

Really? I'm sure that I've read on Martin's pages that you're able to try again, is that not the case?

sun73

As far as I am aware, you are allowed a further three years under the limitations act to re-submit your complaint again on the grounds that you have only recently become aware you may have been ineligible for cover on the policy for the reasons you describe, send evidence of your pre existing condition and fixed term contract at the point of sale. Also, check the terms and conditions to see if it mentions employment exclusions.

antrobus

-taff wrote: »

You have already complained once, so you're well out of time to forward your complaint to the FOS. You also cannot complain about the same thing twice.

Forget it, you're out of luck.

I suppose the OP could ask BC to reconsider their original decision in the light of this 'new information'. But if (as likely) BC say their decision stands, the OP is indeed scuppered.

sun73 wrote: »

As far as I am aware, you are allowed a further three years under the limitations act to re-submit your complaint again on the grounds that you have only recently become aware you may have been ineligible for cover on the policy for the reasons you describe, send evidence of your pre existing condition and fixed term contract at the point of sale. Also, check the terms and conditions to see if it mentions employment exclusions.

Doesn't really help. The FOS applies a six month time.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/six-month-time-limit.htm

sun73

Barclays don't impose a six month time limit if there's new information to consider, however, they might standby their original decision. None of us on here have got a crystal ball, who knows the op might be successful if he/she re-submits the complaint.

[Deleted User]

sun73 wrote: »

None of us on here have got a crystal ball, who knows the op might be successful if he/she re-submits the complaint.

I think it's unfair to suggest people re-submit rejected complaints as it gives false hope and encourages people to clog up the already congested PPI complaint departments of the Banks. People with new complaints will wait longer as a result.

Only those with new and verifiable evidence should re-submit. The OP clearly has nothing new to add to the original complaint which was rejected on the basis that it was an online application. In such circumstances, fixed term contracts and pre-existing conditions are irrelevant because the OP (mis)bought the insurance rather than being (mis)sold it.

The OP could certainly choose to complain that there was a pre-ticked box on the application screen , but if the Bank have already rejected it would seem that this was not the case and the OP can hardly offer any evidence in that regard.

In addition, any redress awarded would still be subject to CMC fees.

roonaldo

The original complaint should have already been looked at in line with PS10/12 published by the FSA in 2010 as this made firms look at all aspects of the sale. Theoretically new evidence shouldnt make any difference. Plus the fact they have issued their final response and you have missed the FOS referral. You can try again but dont be surprised if you just get a letter saying its a previous complaint already responded to.

magpiecottage

The time limit can be waived in "exceptional circumstances". The typical reason is medical issues.

New information is possible but only if the complainant can show that the infomartion was not previously available to them. The fact that you were on a fixed term contract is not "new" information, it is simply something you did not include in your complaint.

So the firm seems within its rights to timebar.

Insider101

magpiecottage wrote: »

The time limit can be waived in "exceptional circumstances". The typical reason is medical issues.

New information is possible but only if the complainant can show that the infomartion was not previously available to them. The fact that you were on a fixed term contract is not "new" information, it is simply something you did not include in your complaint.

So the firm seems within its rights to timebar.

Is the correct answer.

Insider101

roonaldo wrote: »

The original complaint should have already been looked at in line with PS10/12 published by the FSA in 2010 as this made firms look at all aspects of the sale. Theoretically new evidence shouldnt make any difference. Plus the fact they have issued their final response and you have missed the FOS referral. You can try again but dont be surprised if you just get a letter saying its a previous complaint already responded to.

Is also the correct answer.