Claim for unused PPI

Trunk_z

Hi all,

My partner took out a credit card in 2009, it had "Credit Card Repayments Cover" on it - she had know idea, we are in the process of moving house and were going through a pile of paperwork!
This sounds like PPI to me.

However, the credit card was never used, so the insurance was never used.
It was however mis-sold, as it wasn't needed, wanted or even known about.

Would this qualify for a PPI claim?

Many thanks,
Chris

meer53

Trunk_z wrote: »

Hi all,

My partner took out a credit card in 2009, it had "Credit Card Repayments Cover" on it - she had know idea, we are in the process of moving house and were going through a pile of paperwork!
This sounds like PPI to me.

However, the credit card was never used, so the insurance was never used.
It was however mis-sold, as it wasn't needed, wanted or even known about.

Would this qualify for a PPI claim?

Many thanks,
Chris

If you've never paid any PPI what are your expecting to receive ?

Insider101

Trunk_z wrote: »

Hi all,

My partner took out a credit card in 2009, it had "Credit Card Repayments Cover" on it - she had know idea, we are in the process of moving house and were going through a pile of paperwork!
This sounds like PPI to me.

However, the credit card was never used, so the insurance was never used.
It was however mis-sold, as it wasn't needed, wanted or even known about.

Would this qualify for a PPI claim?

Many thanks,
Chris

It does sound like PPI. So how have you suddenly found out now that she has it after not having known before? What paperwork have you found?

Either way in your circumstances it is really academic. As the previous poster said, if you've never used it you've never paid PPI and hence can't have it refunded. So I'd just cancel the cover (if the card is still active and you don't want it) and have done with it.

Trunk_z

I just wanted to be sure.

I was aware of people having successfully claimed money which they had paid out for PPI + compensation for essentially being lied to, so I perhaps thought that the latter would be grounds for claiming.

I'll let my partner know.

Part of me hopes that there isn't any compensation (money above what a person has paid out) - I try and make good money saving decisions (checking I only have what I want), so it would be a slap in the face to find out I could be rewarded if I wasn't so careful.

Thanks,
Chris

dunstonh

I was aware of people having successfully claimed money which they had paid out for PPI + compensation for essentially being lied to, so I perhaps thought that the latter would be grounds for claiming.

i am not aware of any such payments made. The redress method set by the regulator is a refund of premiums plus interest. No compensation is added.

Insider101

Trunk_z wrote: »

I just wanted to be sure.

I was aware of people having successfully claimed money which they had paid out for PPI + compensation for essentially being lied to, so I perhaps thought that the latter would be grounds for claiming.

This is not the case (or at least I'm not aware of any such cases). At least in part because virtually none of the people who claim they were "lied to" can ever prove it. For that reason most redress offers are goodwill payments without admission of liability. The "compensatory" aspect (I.e) the 8% statutory interest is designed to cover the loss of access to the money over the period between sale and redress offer.

Trunk_z

That's good news then.

Anecdotal evidence is the worst!