We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Soliitors!

13»

Comments

  • So what about the 'managing down' of redress in PPI cases. Its just another example where they take advantage of customers lack of knowledge to deprive them of what they are entitled to.

    They don't re-open these cases because of some altruistic idea, they do it because they get caught bending the rules to disadvantage ordinary people
  • They don't re-open these cases because of some altruistic idea, they do it because they get caught bending the rules to disadvantage ordinary people
    I fail to see how employing a CMC can help customers avoid being "ripped off" by the Bank? Clearly there have been cases where people have been awarded less than they should have been or even wrongly denied a refund altogether. Using a CMC would not change this, the only difference is that a third of any redress would be paid to the claims company!

    The Ombudsman service is the free to use solution to the problems you detail. The problem is the inordinately long waiting time involved.
  • WatchMan
    WatchMan Posts: 187 Forumite
    The Ombudsman service is the free to use solution to the problems you detail. The problem is the inordinately long waiting time involved.

    And even if you use a CMC, the complaint will still probably end up at the FOS and be subject to the same waiting times!
  • WatchMan wrote: »
    And even if you use a CMC, the complaint will still probably end up at the FOS and be subject to the same waiting times!
    Exactly…..
  • meer53
    meer53 Posts: 10,217 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    So what about the 'managing down' of redress in PPI cases. Its just another example where they take advantage of customers lack of knowledge to deprive them of what they are entitled to.

    They don't re-open these cases because of some altruistic idea, they do it because they get caught bending the rules to disadvantage ordinary people

    If the customers themselves don't know why they were missold, how would you expect a claims company to know that ?

    Banks may have taken advantage of the PPI scheme at the time but the complaints procedure now in place to offer redress for this is in place, and free to use for anyone.

    10% payments to anyone for dealing with a complaint about PPI is completely unnecessary.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.