Which PPI reclaims company

antrobus

addedvaluebob wrote: »

.. I suggest you research elsewhere following the main PPI reclaim site guidelines on there.....

This one you mean?

Reclaim PPI for Free
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-loan-insurance

That contains the sentence "Don't hand 30% to a no-win, no-fee PPI claims handler".:)

antrobus

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

What "hidden" T&Cs?
....

I think the OP might be refering to the hidden T&Cs of the claims companies, rather than the original PPI sellers.

addedvaluebob

antrobus wrote: »

This one you mean?

Reclaim PPI for Free
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/ppi-loan-insurance

That contains the sentence "Don't hand 30% to a no-win, no-fee PPI claims handler".:)

and also includes a checklist to determine if you want to use a claims company and links to the blog showing the problems of picking a company and the problems with the poor regulation of this sector. Martin's blog also mentions that he wouldn't be so against claims companies if they were better regulated.

Nasqueron

addedvaluebob wrote: »

Bexxyv, don't waste your time on this forum.

There is no discussion about anything a claims company may or may not provide this is just a slagging off CMC forum. There is no acceptance that some people may actually want to use a company to remove some of the paperwork and not all charge 30%. I suggest you research elsewhere following the main PPI reclaim site guidelines on there.

The problem with slagging off every CMC as being lying crooks who charge 30% is that people end up with no information and end up with the very companies that should be avoided.

Except CMCs do NOT eliminate any of the paperwork as you well know. To put in a complaint the CMC still requires you to provide details of your financial history, work contracts and all the other stuff for the FOS form and if you can do all that, why pay someone 30% or more of your compo just to post a letter?

This is the Money Saving website, not the money wasting website.

The trouble with CMCs is people not understanding how little they do and how much they cost. How many of the firms have you cold called to check they tell you the process can be done yourself for free? How many make it clear their contract will allow them a cut of future complaints even if you don't authorise them to look at them? How many make it totally clear that if the bank offsets some or all of the PPI claim against old debts they will still want you to pay their cut out of money you did not receive? For that matter, how many will tell you not to go with them if you had old debts as they know you may not get anything. It is an industry of sharks preying on the people who were misled by banks as they know they can fool those people into believing they will get a huge pot of money without making it clear that they do nothing that you cannot do yourself for free and you will still end up doing all the work you wanted to avoid.

-taff

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5013413

addedvaluebob

Nasqueron wrote: »

Except CMCs do NOT eliminate any of the paperwork as you well know. To put in a complaint the CMC still requires you to provide details of your financial history, work contracts and all the other stuff for the FOS form and if you can do all that, why pay someone 30% or more of your compo just to post a letter?

This is the Money Saving website, not the money wasting website.

The trouble with CMCs is people not understanding how little they do and how much they cost. How many of the firms have you cold called to check they tell you the process can be done yourself for free? How many make it clear their contract will allow them a cut of future complaints even if you don't authorise them to look at them? How many make it totally clear that if the bank offsets some or all of the PPI claim against old debts they will still want you to pay their cut out of money you did not receive? For that matter, how many will tell you not to go with them if you had old debts as they know you may not get anything. It is an industry of sharks preying on the people who were misled by banks as they know they can fool those people into believing they will get a huge pot of money without making it clear that they do nothing that you cannot do yourself for free and you will still end up doing all the work you wanted to avoid.

This is a discussion forum. Except there is never any discussion just the constant slagging off.

Your points about what a CMC may or may not do should be referred to the regulator except they are completely useless at regulating.

For interest, how many of these sharks are/ were IFA's. How many of these flogged endowments and folded the company when the claims came in, how many of them failed to disclose commission or make it clear that alternative cheaper charging products were equally suitable and available how many sold expensive policies with high commissions when cheaper suitable alternatives were available. The problem is not the principle of CMC's but the people who prey on the british public generally.

By not having an open discussion people end up with the rubbish companies because there is no information.

-taff

addedvaluebob wrote: »

By not having an open discussion people end up with the rubbish companies because there is no information.

There are no good companies.
If there were, they would point out you can do it yourself for nothing.

addedvaluebob

So you must be suggesting that no company complies with this rule from the MoJ.

Client Specific Rules, Rule 10: Before seeking to enter into a contract with a client a business must make reasonable enquiries as to whether the client has alternative mechanisms for pursuing a claim and must advise the client unambiguously of ombudsman schemes or other official means of redress.

magpiecottage

addedvaluebob wrote: »

So you must be suggesting that no company complies with this rule from the MoJ.

Client Specific Rules, Rule 10: Before seeking to enter into a contract with a client a business must make reasonable enquiries as to whether the client has alternative mechanisms for pursuing a claim and must advise the client unambiguously of ombudsman schemes or other official means of redress.

To do this they need to ask:

1. Do you have all the information to fill in this form because without it the complaint is a non-starter?
2. Are you too thick to write it down on the consumer friendly form provided by the Financial Ombudsman Service?
3. Are you too thick to take a couple of copies of it?
4. Are you too thick to put one copy in an envelope?
5. Are you too thick to write the address of the company you are complaining to on it?
6. Are you too thick to put a stamp on it?
7. Are you too thick to put it into and put it into a post box?
8. Are you too thick to decide whether or not to send one of the copies to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you do not like the answer you get?

If the answer to Question 1 and any other question is "Yes" then the CMC can achieve more than you can do for yourself.


Otherwise you will be significantly better off doing it yourself.



I am not sure how a CMC could profitably pursue PPI complaints if it properly complied with that rule so I think -taff seems to be correct.

As you say, though, the claims regulator is completely useless at regulating - so CMCs ignore the rules.

Perhaps if the government fulfilled is promise to bring them under the Legal Ombudsman we would then see consumers complaining that they were not told they could DIY free and the market would die the death it so richly deserves.

addedvaluebob

magpiecottage wrote: »

I am not sure how a CMC could profitably pursue PPI complaints if it properly complied with that rule so I think -taff seems to be correct.

As you say, though, the claims regulator is completely useless at regulating - so CMCs ignore the rules.

Perhaps if the government fulfilled is promise to bring them under the Legal Ombudsman we would then see consumers complaining that they were not told they could DIY free and the market would die the death it so richly deserves.

That will be the same Legal Ombudsman that is due to commence regulation next January and oversees complaints about lawyers who still run a load of the claims companies.

As for your list, the only thing a CMC has to do is make them aware there is a fee free process and include it in the terms and conditions, but it is nice to know that you think every individual who has ever used a CMC is thick.