Joanne74

Joanne74

I am new to this so please bear with me. I have claims with Egg and MBNA for PPI reclaim from late 1990's and early 2000's. MBNA was postal application but I was on a two year fixed term contract at time - can they defend to say it was non-advised sale? With the Egg one, I recall that I couldn't complete application online without accepting PPI. Looking at threads on here, I am not confident of success but these are genuine claims. FOS, in my opinion, is not the best service so would appreciate any advice please.

[Deleted User]

Joanne74 wrote: »

MBNA was postal application but I was on a two year fixed term contract at time - can they defend to say it was non-advised sale?

If you applied by post, then you mis-bought if the insurance was not suitable for you. It can only be mis-sold if someone actually sold it to you.

Joanne74 wrote: »

With the Egg one, I recall that I couldn't complete application online without accepting PPI.

Again, you mis-bought if you applied online. It was up to you not to proceed if it was not possible to continue the application without accepting PPI.

No Bank staff were present, so no mis-sale.

Joanne74 wrote: »

. FOS, in my opinion, is not the best service so would appreciate any advice please.

FOS are your ONLY option if the Banks have rejected your complaints. However, they won't overturn the rejection if there was no mis-sale.

dunstonh

MBNA was postal application but I was on a two year fixed term contract at time - can they defend to say it was non-advised sale?

In most cases, yes they can. You were not mis-sold. no-one sold it to you. you bought it. However, a very very small number of cases like this do succeed but are reliant on an admin failure.

With the Egg one, I recall that I couldn't complete application online without accepting PPI. Looking at threads on here, I am not confident of success but these are genuine claims.

Neither of these seems to be a genuine complaint.

FOS, in my opinion, is not the best service so would appreciate any advice please

The FOS are consumer biased but are not consumer champions. They look at both sides and made a judgement call based on the evidence provided. In your case, both of yours would need an administration failure to succeed (such as pre-ticked box in case of Egg -that doesnt apply to paper applications)