Halifax ppi claim rejected

trevwales201

Could someone please tell me if the following points are worth going to the fos with. I don't want to be wasting their time as I'm sure they've got enough cases to handle. I think I have a case but halifax have knocked me back twice.

I believe I was mis sold in a number of ways.
: I was told that the policy would help my chances of being accepted for a mortgage.
: The representative was aware of my partner’s income which was not considered as part of the mortgage application but should've been considered enough to cover repayments if needed.
: Other income I received included Tax Credits and Family Allowance; these were not considered as part of the mortgage application but should have been considered relevant in terms of cover for the mortgage payments if needed.
:I was told that the policy would be payable over the term of the mortgage, the first part of which was 5 years fixed and I was not made aware of my right to cancel within 14 days or at any time over that 5 year period.
: I was specifically told that the policy would allow me to take a payment holiday at any time should I experience financial difficulties. THIS WAS A LIE. It turned out to be part of the mortgage terms and was down to the discretion of the bank which we only found out after being refused twice.
: The previous point is particularly relevant as my Husband left work to go into full time education believing that we were covered by the PPI if my job was in threat or I suffered illness.
: Whilst my Husband was in college I had to have surgery which left me out of work for a significant period of time, this is the first time we requested a payment holiday and were refused. At no point were we told that PPI was something separate and we should claim through that. We went through this process again and were declined a second time, again, receiving no further information.
It is my belief that I was mis- sold on a number of levels and the bank are yet to give reasonable explanation for the above points, only saying that they believe I wasn’t missold.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

[Deleted User]

I see nothing in your post that makes a legitimate mis-selling complaint. You appear to think that not reading the terms of your mortgage is reason to complain. Everything you list as not being aware of will be detailed in your mortgage documentation.

Surely the Bank have already countered all the points you make in their two rejection letters? If you were granted the mortgage then why are you complaining that your husband's income and your tax credits were not taken into consideration? Obviously, they did offer you the mortgage!

As for the payment holiday, it's hardly "a lie" if the terms were clearly outlined but you failed to read them?

Your actual PPI complaint (that you were told it would help your chances) is weak hearsay for which you can provide no evidence.

If you take this "complaint" to FOS, I would expect you to wait around eighteen months for the Ombudsman to side with the Bank in the circumstances you describe.

trevwales201

The point I'm making about the income is that it wasn't down on the mortgage application as part of my income but that the banker was aware of this other income that could well have covered the payments if needed, hence, PPI wasn't needed. Also, with regards to the details in the mortgage documentation, I felt that what I was being told in the bank by the banker was true. Are you saying that what the Banker told me can be discounted as it told 'the truth' in the documentation and I shouldn't have trusted what I was being told.

[Deleted User]

trevwales201 wrote: »

Are you saying that what the Banker told me can be discounted as it told 'the truth' in the documentation and I shouldn't have trusted what I was being told.

No, but nothing you are saying you were told is actually provable. That's why it's called "hearsay", it's just your word against theirs and all the documentation points to them having said otherwise I'm afraid. No one wins "hearsay" complaints unless other faults are found during the Bank's investigation.

As for your income being evidence that you didn't need PPI, then I'm afraid your mistaken. If anything, the other income shows that you did need payment protection.

KennethC

Quite frankly, from reading your post I do not think that you have much chance at all and I'm afraid the Ombudsman will be of little help as it is mostly hearsay and the T&C's do not appear to favour you. Sorry

dunstonh

: I was told that the policy would help my chances of being accepted for a mortgage.

What evidence do you have to support that allegation? (no evidence would see that point fail)

: The representative was aware of my partner’s income which was not considered as part of the mortgage application but should've been considered enough to cover repayments if needed.

Irrelevant reason. A debt was taken on that would need to be paid. A reduction in income would impact both of you and a financial need exists for the policy to cover that.

Other income I received included Tax Credits and Family Allowance; these were not considered as part of the mortgage application but should have been considered relevant in terms of cover for the mortgage payments if needed.

Irrelevant as these are not guaranteed and if you have to rely on these then it actually helps Halifax justify the recommendation. It doesnt help you.

:I was told that the policy would be payable over the term of the mortgage, the first part of which was 5 years fixed and I was not made aware of my right to cancel within 14 days or at any time over that 5 year period.

You cant prove what was or wasnt said. Plus, cancellation rights are issued in the post along with the policy documentation. So, they have an audit trail that counters that reason.

I was specifically told that the policy would allow me to take a payment holiday at any time should I experience financial difficulties. THIS WAS A LIE. It turned out to be part of the mortgage terms and was down to the discretion of the bank which we only found out after being refused twice.

A payment holiday (or authorised arrears) has not linked to the policy. The policy would pay out in the event of you meeting the claims criteria. Authorised arrears do not have any impact on that. Authorised arrears are always at the discretion of the lender and has nothing to do with PPI.

The previous point is particularly relevant as my Husband left work to go into full time education believing that we were covered by the PPI if my job was in threat or I suffered illness.

What you believe on a later change of events doesnt have any impact on the sale of the policy unless you have something in writing saying you would be covered. You would be covered on the existing terms unless you changed them.

Whilst my Husband was in college I had to have surgery which left me out of work for a significant period of time, this is the first time we requested a payment holiday and were refused. At no point were we told that PPI was something separate and we should claim through that. We went through this process again and were declined a second time, again, receiving no further information.

Authorised arrears and PPI are not linked. Dont mix these things up.

It is my belief that I was mis- sold on a number of levels and the bank are yet to give reasonable explanation for the above points, only saying that they believe I wasn’t missold.

problem is that there is very little you have said that indicates mis-sale is able to be proven or be likely. Your financial situation certainly indicates you had a financial need for it. Your allegations are unprovable and some can be countered with evidence. Mixing up authorised arrears with PPI doesnt help a PPI complaint. It is unlikely you have anything to suggest that authorised arrears are automatically granted. In most cases, there is no reference to authorised arrears or where there is then it is usually stated in the contact that they are at the discretion of the lender. None of that impacts on the sale of PPI though.

The point I'm making about the income is that it wasn't down on the mortgage application as part of my income but that the banker was aware of this other income that could well have covered the payments if needed

problem is that your complaint reasons contradict that and show a financial need for it.

I felt that what I was being told in the bank by the banker was true.

Prove it then. However, its equally likely that words like could get mixed up with should or would and your memory fades over time. It is estimated that 70% of what is said in a meeting is forgotten within a month. It may also be possible that at the time, Halifax were easy on giving out payment holidays but later on (especially post credit crunch) that they tightened up.

Just because you say something in the truth does not mean it is. Equally they cant make that claim either. This is why evidence is used.

trevwales201

A payment holiday (or authorised arrears) has not linked to the policy. The policy would pay out in the event of you meeting the claims criteria. Authorised arrears do not have any impact on that. Authorised arrears are always at the discretion of the lender and has nothing to do with PPI.



I was led to believe that they were the same thing at the time and that doesn't explain why I wasn't eligible to use the policy. When I phoned and explained my situation to the bank, surely they would have been aware of the fact I was eligible to use the policy, even if I wasn't aware.

Whilst it seems I don't have a case, I do feel like I was coned out of using my policy, on the basis of being a little bit slow.

Oh well, time to move on. At least I know now. Thanks to all for the advice.

[Deleted User]

trevwales201 wrote: »

surely they would have been aware of the fact I was eligible to use the policy, even if I wasn't aware.

In future, you need to thoroughly read everything you sign.

I agree it's remiss of the Bank not to suggest that you make a claim on your PPI policy, but this isn't mis-selling and it's your own responsibility to make a claim if you suffer a claimable event.

dunstonh

I was led to believe that they were the same thing at the time and that doesn't explain why I wasn't eligible to use the policy.

They have no connection at all. It does not make you ineligible.

When I phoned and explained my situation to the bank, surely they would have been aware of the fact I was eligible to use the policy, even if I wasn't aware.

One of the reasons most MPPI complaints fail is that the the insurance is standalone and not built into the debt. However, this also means that the person at the bank will not necessarily know if you have insurance or not. It would be nice of them to say but this is a problem when you arrange things with big companies with lots of staff. You cant assume they have access to all your details all of the time. In many areas, they are actually not allowed to have access under the data protection act as it involves separate subsidiary companies or third party companies.

If the illness/surgery was not too long ago, you could actually still put in a retrospective claim on the policy. Some of the banks will look to see if a claim would have been paid out and if so, they will pay out. it really depends on how long ago it was.