how to begin reclaiming PPI

addedvaluebob

Nasqueron wrote: »

But that still doesn't mean it is hidden - it would appear on every credit card statement with a balance not cleared, it would appear on the documentation of the loan, it would appear on the summary with cooling off period etc etc

Martin is a consumer champion and very anti-bank, like the FOS he generally takes a one sided view of these things in favour of the customer even if the customer is wrong.

But the fact is it didn't appear on all the paperwork in every circumstance. Some documentation only details the monthly repayment and not the specific and clear cost of the PPI or effect on the monthly amount paid or interest charged.

If Martin takes a one sided view (and I have disagreed with plenty of things on here) then the question to some posters is should they be posting and commenting on here. Its not a criticism, just an open question.

roonaldo

addedvaluebob wrote: »

But the fact is it didn't appear on all the paperwork in every circumstance

So it may have appeared on some paperwork then. Sometimes credit card PPI was taken out on phone after the agreement was signed, often when you phoned to activate your card. If a conversation is forgotten by the customer then that doesnt mean its mis-sold. But even if in that event it cannot be hidden as it will appear on the monthly statement.

I think since i've dealt with insurance reviewing in the last 7 years or so I've never seen a hidden PPI.

Some documentation only details the monthly repayment and not the specific and clear cost of the PPI or effect on the monthly amount paid or interest charged.

But thats a different issue. Costs not being disclosed doesnt mean its hidden. You have points but they are just not related to it being hidden.

addedvaluebob

But it still remains a reason why thousands of people have claimed successfully that they did not know PPI was included in the loan and was bundled into the monthly repayment amount without it being explicitly pointed out in the paperwork.

-taff

It is pointed out int he paperwork, and signed for.

roonaldo

There is no such thing as 'hidden PPI', its CMC propaganda, its not even a sales failing identified by the FSA (see ps10/12). To have a PPI policy means you must have paid a premium at some point, if so then there will be a record of this being paid somewhere whether its on a credit agreement or statement. And if its not listed then its more fraud then mis-selling.

Nasqueron

addedvaluebob wrote: »

But it still remains a reason why thousands of people have claimed successfully that they did not know PPI was included in the loan and was bundled into the monthly repayment amount without it being explicitly pointed out in the paperwork.

This is the correlation = causation logical fallacy.

An unprovable or incorrect allegation does not win a case (CC PPI appears on every statement as it increases the balance for example; loan PPI would be on the statement when it is signed even if the salesman rushes through the points - customer may have missed this or forgotten but it is not hidden).

However, the case may be won via auto-payout, another failing in the process, banks clearing their backlogs without reviewing cases etc

Just because people complained it was hidden and won the case does not mean they won the case because it was hidden

addedvaluebob

Okay, so who is going to write to Martin and ask him to remove this misleading reference from the PPI reclaim guide then or are you all suggesting that every PPI plan was sold correctly and every single complaint was upheld for some other reason.

Why did he include this in the PPI reclaim guide if he did not think it was true.

and this from the FOS PPI guide

If it seems to us that the business didn’t make it clear that the consumer was taking out PPI – or didn’t give the consumer basic
information about the policy and how it worked – we can tell the business to refund premiums the consumer has paid.

Nasqueron

Okay, so who is going to write to Martin and ask him to remove this misleading reference from the PPI reclaim guide

I believe Martin isn't a qualified financial advisor so his suggestion is just an opinion, PPI seems to have peaked so seems little point, it's just a meaningless accusation over the sale with no proof as documentary evidence would not support that claim.

or are you all suggesting that every PPI plan was sold correctly and every single complaint was upheld for some other reason.

Irrelevant strawman arguments - I did not say that, I said that people who make a claim PPI was hidden who won do not win for that reason alone

The FOS PPI guide you quoted does not make any reference to "hidden" PPI though, just that they didn't make it clear what they were getting/paying for which is a miss-sale reason.

[Deleted User]

Nasqueron wrote: »

Just because people complained it was hidden and won the case does not mean they won the case because it was hidden

Exactly, none of the Banks actually explain the reasons they uphold complaints. This means people assume that if they've complained the PPI was "hidden" then this is why the Bank have upheld. Claim companies promote this as a possible complaint reason because it plays well on people's general mistrust of Banks and encourages those who might not otherwise do so to complain.

[Deleted User]

addedvaluebob wrote: »

If Martin takes a one sided view then the question to some posters is should they be posting and commenting on here.

It's been pointed out before that this is an open forum in which anyone can post. It's a forum for open discussion and no one needs to necessarily agree with an MSE party line.

addedvaluebob wrote: »

who is going to write to Martin and ask him to remove this misleading reference from the PPI reclaim guide

The most recent version of the MSE advice article was not written by Martin Lewis, but by MSE staff member Wendy Alcock.

Martin Lewis sold this website some months back.