Adjudicator rejects our claim

Brokerwise

roonaldo wrote: »

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.

In those circumstances what would be classed as good cover for the self employed? If a hairdresser just decided one day he or she wanted to be a cleaner they have to be excluded from certain elements an employed policy enjoys. The sickness and accident element are still important and also what if the case was non advised ?

roonaldo

Brokerwise wrote: »

In those circumstances what would be classed as good cover for the self employed? If a hairdresser just decided one day he or she wanted to be a cleaner they have to be excluded from certain elements an employed policy enjoys.
The sickness and accident element are still important and also what if the case was non advised ?

Yes I see what your saying and agree, I was only saying it from a FOS point of view. FOS want customers to be able to make a claim with no onerous conditions for all components of the policy (A,S &U). I've seen advised sales where customer was made clear in demands and needs they would have to involuntarily cease trading and they overturn these.

Non advised- They consider for self-employed people that they should be drawn to the unemployment conditions for self-employed so they can make that choice. (see case study 4)
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi/PPI-case-studies.html

and

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/104/104-ppi.html#cs3

Insider101

Brokerwise wrote: »

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.

This is typical FOS. They don't consider this type of PPI suitable for the self-employed and so unless you have an extremely clear indisputable set of evidence they will decide against you on nothing more than guesswork. Basically ignoring the law with regards to burden of proof.