PPI reclaim administration fee. moneyclaims.net

icbaldwin82

Hi there,

A couple of months ago i recieved a cold call from a company called moneyclaims.net. They explained that i had a potential PPI claim with Barclaycard. I have claimed PPI before 2 years ago (turns out if was from the same card they were ringing about - more on that later). So i went through the questions that the pleasant man was asking me, i cant remember them exactly. Ok so he said he was going to send me a form in the post and all i need to do is sign it and not read through as he'd filled in all the details based on our phone conversation. This phone call was starting to drag on (id been put on hold for a while) to about 15 minutes, i was at work and concious that i'd been away from my desk for a while. Anyway, a day or two later the form arrives in the post so i sign it and send it back along with a photocopy of my barclaycard statement. They send me a text saying theyve recieved my form and my claim is underway.
Today i get a letter in the post informing me that the claims has been rejected as the PPI had already been claimed and i owe them an administration fee of £225!! the breakdown of this details 'initial complaint' £90, 'letters sent' £40, 'Telephone calls' £18, 'Length of time' £57. Ive phoned the company incensed at this cost and the woman said that this would of been explained to me on the phone and was in the small print of the contract i signed. It probably was in the small print, and i cant remember if they asked me if i'd claimed on this card before, but at no point was it made clear to me that i'd incur and admin cost else i would of stopped the 'claim' there and then. She said they will listen back to the initial phone conversation and get back to me. According to the letter i have 7 days to pay this fee. What should i do?
Also how can they justify £225 for some phone calls and letters? What are my rights here? any help would be greatly appreciated, ive called the ministry of justice and they are calling me back tomorrow

Many thanks for reading and beware of moneyclaims.net

dunstonh

Does everyone in world who got mis sold PPI need to get their head screwed on?

You didnt just get mis-sold PPI. You were mis-sold claims company too. Ever heard of once bitten, twice shy?

icbaldwin82

I think the key word there is mis-sold. It wasn't me doing the mis-selling. I certainly won't be giving these companies the time of day anymore

Stupid_Question

icbaldwin82 wrote: »

I think the key word there is mis-sold. It wasn't me doing the mis-selling. I certainly won't be giving these companies the time of day anymore

it's a never ending cycle of it being someone else's fault.


:wall:

icbaldwin82

Stupid_Question wrote: »

it's a never ending cycle of it being someone else's fault.


:wall:

Yes so I got conned and didn't read the small print. The PPI claim company should have ethics to explain thing on the phone and not just skirt over the important issue that could arise. Anyway thanks for your 'input'

[Deleted User]

icbaldwin82 wrote: »

The PPI claim company should have ethics to explain thing on the phone

You really shouldn't sign your name to legally-binding contracts you apparently don't understand. The contract was sent to you, it therefore didn't need explaining over the 'phone. You weren't "conned", it was the Claims Company who weren't given the whole story by you. Now you pay the penalty.

Regardless, you knew full well that you'd already received redress, so employing a Claims Company to attempt to make the same complaint about the same finance was always going to end in (your) tears.

icbaldwin82

Point taken, I won't be signing anything so hastily from now on. The actual small print wasn't even on the form I signed but a separate 'claim pack' enclosed in the same envelope.

And I'm not crying

[Deleted User]

icbaldwin82 wrote: »

And I'm not crying

Perhaps not, but your wallet is £225 lighter and you have nothing to show for it.

icbaldwin82 wrote: »

The actual small print wasn't even on the form I signed

This is irrelevant, the terms of the contract are still legally binding.

icbaldwin82

Well we live and learn

Anyway thanks for all your 'advice', I guess I've learned to not trust what people say on the phone and be more scrupulous with small print

[Deleted User]

icbaldwin82 wrote: »

Anyway thanks for all your 'advice',

All of our advice was after the event and too late to do any good. However, if you had asked before employing the firm, the advice would have been resoundingly no to using a claims firm at all-let alone to make a duplicate complaint.

Thanks for posting your experience. If nothing else, it will hopefully warn others of the pitfalls of using a CMC at all.

Alpine_Star

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

This is irrelevant, the terms of the contract are still legally binding.

Of course it's relevant. Terms in consumer contracts are required by law to be in ''plain and intelligible language''. Terms are incapable of being legally binding if they're in no language at all.