Adjudicator rejects our claim

Nasqueron

OnlyAlan wrote: »

You have nothing to lose by appealing the decision to the Ombudsman. From memory, I believe they uphold over 50% of appeals. It is a chance to re-state your claim and shows you are serious and not just 'chancing it'. I have done so successfully.

I would also make mention of any claims that have been upheld on your behalf on the same grounds against the same bank.

Figures quoted on this site from FOS decisions actually show around 90% of the time the Ombudsman agrees with the Adjudicator, it is possible but unlikely they will overturn this (statistically speaking only)

[Deleted User]

OnlyAlan wrote: »

You have nothing to lose by appealing the decision to the Ombudsman.

Just time, around six to eight months.

OnlyAlan wrote: »

I believe they uphold over 50% of appeals.

If they were overturning Adjudicator decisions at the rate of one in two I'd expect those adjudicators to lose their jobs!
The Ombudsman sides with the adjudicator in 90% of cases.

OnlyAlan wrote: »

I would also make mention of any claims that have been upheld on your behalf on the same grounds against the same bank.

Successful complaints about PPI on loans and credit cards are irrelevant to a complaint about mortgage PPI. Every case is dealt with on it's own merits and success with one complaint has no bearing on the result of another.

addedvaluebob

Lyn, I suggest you ask for an Ombudsman ruling. No-one on here understands your circumstances or reasons for complaint as well as you do and obviously there is a 10% chance of success. Currently you have nothing so there is nothing to lose.

Go through all the correspondence and make sure that anything that has been wrongly interpreted by the adjudicator or dismissed is
re-highlighted to the Ombudsman. Also double check any T & C's to see if they exclude your claim and highlight any similarities between your upheld complaints and this policy to demonstrate inconsistency of the original complaint handler.

Downside is that it may take 18-24 months before you get a ruling but put the case in and be patient

magpiecottage

addedvaluebob wrote: »

Lyn, I suggest you ask for an Ombudsman ruling No-one on here understands your circumstances or reasons for complaint as well as you do and obviously there is a 10% chance of success. Currently you have nothing so there is nothing to lose.

I agree there is nothing to lose.

However, we know that the product seems to have been affordable and Halifax was not a lender that included the PPI in the main mortgage payment (and did not do single premium PPI for mortgages), whilst the policy would have paid a redundancy claim.

So the main suitability criteria seem to have been met and, since a separate direct debit was required, the argument that the OP didn't know about it has a credibility problem.

highlight any similarities between your upheld complaints and this policy to demonstrate inconsistency of the original complaint handler.

That will not make a difference. The Ombudsman will look at this complaint on its merits. The other policies may have different reasons for being upheld, including a commercial decision not to fight it (it would incure a fee of £850 to do so) and even just a mistake.

Downside is that it may take 18-24 months before you get a ruling but put the case in and be patient

May be a bit less now as numbers are tailing off - but still likely to be some months and the odds are stacked against the OP.

misschicken

Just because the policy says it covers the self-employed doesn't mean it automatically covers everyone who's self-employed. It's down to the wording of the policy at the time of the sale and also the nature of your husband's work and how it was sold to you with that in mind. It's not one size fits all. My MPPI case went to the Ombudsman who over-ruled the adjudicator who had stuck rigidly to the 'the policy covers self-employed' line and paid as little attention to my actual circumstances as the person who sold me the policy in the first place. It can happen, although I know I am very much in the minority.

Lyn72

Hi, thank you all for your comments, it's appreciated. I think we may get in touch with Halifax and see if we can still get a copy of the policy, probably not. My Husband is a self employed Joiner. We had a Mortgage with the Halifax before we re-mortgaged with them and interestingly enough PPI was not added then so not sure how they saw fit to add it at that point when we managed without it before.

Agentmomo

Hi, It is always worth going to the Ombudsman if you have the paperwork that shows you have paid PPI, regardless of employment status. Too many companies these days are swift to tell you that you never paid PPI, because it's easier to try to fob you off. I found actual bills that showed PPI payments and after referring to the ombudsman that matter was found in my favour within months.


Good luck

dunstonh

We had a Mortgage with the Halifax before we re-mortgaged with them and interestingly enough PPI was not added then so not sure how they saw fit to add it at that point when we managed without it before.

Possibly they did not offer it the same way. They had a different product before the TMPP. Different staff members didnt always have permissions to do insurance.

Hi, It is always worth going to the Ombudsman if you have the paperwork that shows you have paid PPI, regardless of employment status. Too many companies these days are swift to tell you that you never paid PPI, because it's easier to try to fob you off. I found actual bills that showed PPI payments and after referring to the ombudsman that matter was found in my favour within months.

The OP has already gone to the FOS and the FOS rejected it and based solely on the content of this thread, you can see why. However, the op can appeal that to an ombudsman if they wish but that only has an 11% success rate on current figures and the complaint reasons are not strong here. i.e. it doesnt look like an adjudicator mistake.

Brokerwise

dunstonh wrote: »

Halifax MPPI covers the self employed. Most MPPI does cover self employed fine. Its loan and credit card PPI where self employed is more of an issue.

Funnily enough I am disputing a claim upheld by FOS on a monthly mortgage PPI case that they have initially ruled that even though the policy covered self employed that because the redundancy aspect was not the same as an employed person they have found against me ! Will be interesting to see what result the appeal comes up with.

roonaldo

FOS dont like the policies that you have to involuntarily cease trading (go bust). Not sure how some self-employed can go bust ie a cleaner, mobile hairdresser where as a shop owner could quite easily.