capital one ppi

driver1987

hi I expect this has been coverd before but can I ask please I filled in capital ones form to recover PPi that I have had since 2003 and was sent a reply within two weeks saying they had checked my case and because I had ticked the box saying I wanted PPi that my case was closed and not valid
they also stated that they sold PPi without needing to give advice as to wether I needed it or not so my question is do I try through the ombudsman or give up ?
At the time I was working in a factory and I was entitled to 6 months full sick pay so I'm guessing PPI shouldn't have been sold to me .

dunstonh

they also stated that they sold PPi without needing to give advice as to wether I needed it or not so my question is do I try through the ombudsman or give up ?

Impossible for us to say as you have given us no information about your complaint.

At the time I was working in a factory and I was entitled to 6 months full sick pay so I'm guessing PPI shouldn't have been sold to me .

That does not mean you should not have been sold it. 6 months is not a lot. you tend to find that its 12 months on short term debts but if the PPI paid out in addition to employer benefits and it was a non-advised sale, then it would not be a problem.

[Deleted User]

driver1987 wrote: »

At the time I was working in a factory and I was entitled to 6 months full sick pay so I'm guessing PPI shouldn't have been sold to me .

This is not a valid mis-selling reason! Working "in a factory" (assuming you worked more than 16 hours a week) just indicates that the insurance was suitable for you. Six months sick pay would not cover you in the event of redundancy.

driver1987

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

This is not a valid mis-selling reason! Working "in a factory" (assuming you worked more than 16 hours a week) just indicates that the insurance was suitable for you. Six months sick pay would not cover you in the event of redundancy.

that wasn't what I ment I was explaining my situation as it stood the sick pay and redundancy schemes were very good I was just trying to explain my situation at the time I have always worked and still do a damm site more than 16 hours a week

[Deleted User]

driver1987 wrote: »

I have always worked and still do a damm site more than 16 hours a week

In order to purchase the insurance you had to be working for a minimum of sixteen hours a week. The fact that you have always worked for a "damm site"(sic) more than that is totally irrelevant.



Nothing you have so far said indicates that referring you case to the Ombudsman will succeed. However, you haven't actually detailed what your complaint actually was?

addedvaluebob

Review all the original paperwork and check the dates of documentation very carefully to make sure the documents all have the right dates on them or if some were produced after the date of signing. Beyond that, if you believe you were mis-sold you should refer it to FOS for what at least should be an independent view (subject to the views posted elsewhere with FOS adjudicators)

addedvaluebob

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Over on the TV Moneysaving board of this forum, I've also been accused of working for Sky and Virgin and BT. Do you see any pattern to that?

Maybe it is down to the responses provided, often critical, sometimes dismissive of the poster asking for help and negative and based on little facts other than your own opinion. Other than that can't think of a single thing but hope you find the feedback helpful.