How to claim back PPI

antrobus

addedvaluebob wrote: »

... A CMC should be able to read between the lines of the rejection and take it to FOS if appropriate.
...

You are very mistaken if you think that a CMC 'reads' anything.:rotfl:

All they do is supply the complainant with the forms, get them to fill them in, and then forward them on to the financial instiutiton concerned. CMCs don't take complaints to the FOS in the event of a rejection.

[Deleted User]

addedvaluebob wrote: »

I'll never convince you..

You're correct about that, but you still haven't answered my actual question, which was why you seemingly plucked that 10% figure as somehow "reasonable"?

Nasqueron

addedvaluebob wrote: »

I'll never convince you, but just for fun.

A significant proportion of the UK population are illiterate or financially illiterate.

So how is a CMC manned by untrained call centre temp workers going to help that? The CMC still needs the end user to find out all their financial details - bank accounts, their employment records, account data etc

addedvaluebob wrote: »

Many people, do not have access to the internet, although obviously the OP does

4 million homes don't have internet access (BBC report 8th August 2013) but they can still use a telephone, go to CAB, go to a local library, ask a friend etc

addedvaluebob wrote: »

Some people do not want to spend the time dealing with it, in the same way that some people can't be bothered to do their own plumbing, painting or door hanging.

This is one of the big myths though, the person STILL needs to spend all the time dealing with it in order for the CMC to fill in the form and print it off. CMC cannot create evidence from nothing (though a few try!). Unless the CMC sends someone to sift through all your paperwork and employment records then the person still needs to do all the legwork. The plumbing/painting/door analogy is moot as DIY still needs you to buy the parts whereas a complaint about PPI requires you to simply post a letter.

addedvaluebob wrote: »

The banks and financial institutions lie or employ incompetents to deflect and turn down complaints that the general public do not understand. A CMC should be able to read between the lines of the rejection and take it to FOS if appropriate.

All rejection letters have to tell you that you can refer your complaint to the FOS if you do not agree, no matter what rejection reason. A CMC will refer every rejection to the FOS regardless of merit as they want a cut. A CMC is full of the exact same type of people you accuse the banks of having, just their job is to lie or encourage complaints which are baseless (such as not having PPI).

addedvaluebob wrote: »

As far as the 'free to use' service goes I could kick 95% of all customer complaints into touch based on their lack of financial services knowledge. Most people wouldn't take it any further.

To be frank, a great deal of PPI complaints SHOULD be kicked into touch as they are without merit (little more than buyers remorse or bandwagon jumping) but get auto-payouts to help the banks clear the backlog or avoid the FOS fee - no-one who ticked a box on a website form without any input from the bank, to say they wanted PPI should be expecting a refund, but they still do.

addedvaluebob wrote: »

There are only three reasons why people buy anything, to save time, save money or because they can't do it themselves. I don't think an average fee of £250 + VAT would be too much

But as above, using a CMC does not save time, at best it might save the price of a postage stamp, and as above using a CMC they still have to do it themselves, all the CMC does is fill in the same free of charge form using details provided by the end user, then they add a load of unsupported lies about pressured sales techniques which have no evidence and post it off for you.

I don't know about the average fee but as most of them charge 25%-40% + VAT you will lose thousands of pounds from a legitimate claim and when you reflect on it, you did all the work anyway!

[Deleted User]

antrobus wrote: »

CMCs don't take complaints to the FOS in the event of a rejection.

I think you'll find that, without exception, they do exactly the opposite. CMCs do tell customers to refer their complaints because they want to maximise their chances of commission. The CMCs do this regardless of the validity of the original complaint in the hope of a "goodwill" from the Bank to avoid the FOS fee.

addedvaluebob

10% fee 'reasonable'. Its just my opinion, same as everyone else has an opinion that they are free to post on here.

In passing, I would also point out that a lot of IFA's are running claims companies as an additional income stream.

[Deleted User]

addedvaluebob wrote: »

10% fee 'reasonable'. Its just my opinion

Prior to this you have posted this "information" as if it was a statement of fact. Glad you cleared that up.

addedvaluebob

I think you will find that what I said was 'if you want to use a claims company, don't pay more than 10%' and also ' I don't know of one'

[Deleted User]

addedvaluebob wrote: »

what I said was 'if you want to use a claims company, don't pay more than 10%'

You've mentioned that 10% figure more than once across several threads.
Only here have you stated that it's simply your opinion.