Identify Lloyds Policy Payments

Bloblik

Hi,
I had PPI policies sold by Lloyds bank, starting in Oct/Nov 1996.

Can anyone help me identify the companies providing these:

Consolidated M&G L2YBW******

Ambassador MX********
(may also be LTSB Healthcover)

I also have:
LTSB Gen Ins HEA*********
L&E Ins Lloyds *************
(Lloyds admit it was them but cant tell me whoi provided the cover

Thanks

dunstonh

With Lloyds, consolidated were the insurance for their accident protection plan (lump sum for loss of use of limb, fingers, eyesight etc)

Ambassador was private medical insurance.

L&E is London & Edinburgh. They were on the Lloyds buildings insurance panel in the early to mid 90s.

Bloblik

Thanks !
I am trying to trace Consolidated M&G and Ambassador - but am coming up with nothing, have these companies changed name ?, Lloyds say they have no record.

I have found that L&E is now part of Aviva (Norwich Union), but they say they have no records going back further than 6 years

Do you know who provided: LTSB Gen Ins HEA*********

antrobus

Bloblik wrote: »

Thanks !
I am trying to trace Consolidated M&G and Ambassador - but am coming up with nothing, have these companies changed name ?, ...

Consolidate Insurance were taken over by GE Capital; it looks like the Ambassador Insurance Co Ltd was dissolved in 2011.

magpiecottage

dunstonh wrote: »

With Lloyds, consolidated were the insurance for their accident protection plan (lump sum for loss of use of limb, fingers, eyesight etc)

Which is not PPI

Ambassador was private medical insurance.

Which is not PPI

L&E is London & Edinburgh. They were on the Lloyds buildings insurance panel in the early to mid 90s.

Which is not PPI

The OP is going to have some difficulty with an argument that PPI was missold to them if the product was not PPI at all.

dunstonh

If the products were retailed by Lloyds Bank then the insurers have no liability. Lloyds does. They would have very little detail on file even when the plan was active as all they ever get is the application form. No more than that. Lloyds, being the seller, has all the detail.

Do you know who provided: LTSB Gen Ins HEA*********

No. Thats after my time. However, it does indicate general insurance (so you can eliminate life and pensions). A guess would be Healthcare or health related coverage. It is unlikely to be PPI as that was Pinnacle.

What is it that you are looking for with these payments?

Bloblik

Looking at my Sage nominal records I think the LTSB Gen Ins HEA********* policy replaced the Ambassador policy around September 2000.

I have another thread running which relates:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/66972439#Comment_66972439

In essence - I somehow ended up with 4x insurance policies with Lloyds and 3x with Lombard, when I found out I could cancel the policies - that was it ... I never again signed anything where insurance cover was made a condition of sale/finance - I moved my banking to Bank of Scotland a few years later - who never asked for such insurance, and then took out further Finance arrangements with Lombard and others - who also did not ask for cover to be taken out - as a condition of sale.
Disgusting that the 'salesman' should twist my arm like that in the heat of the moment - I feel quite cheated !

dunstonh

Looking at my Sage nominal records I think the LTSB Gen Ins HEA********* policy replaced the Ambassador policy around September 2000.

That would make sense as the product was called healthcare and was placed through the LTSB general insurance arm.

I never again signed anything where insurance cover was made a condition of sale/finance

You wouldnt have as none of the policies you mention would be a condition of finance except home insurance on secured loans (where it is still a requirement today).

Disgusting that the 'salesman' should twist my arm like that in the heat of the moment - I feel quite cheated !

What evidence exists that they told that you should have them?

These all pre-date insurance regulation and are products that are not normally linked to borrowing (other then property insurance). I would expect nothing more than an application form signed by you to exist. That assumes it still does as you cancelled them so long ago.

Bloblik

I have just spoken to the ombudsman and discussed how decisions are made on claims, and I am confident I was mis-sold, no option was given and pressured selling was present.

What evidence exists ? no bank statements exist, but I have Sage account printouts from which my tax returns were made (put together by my accountant) one can be reconciled with the other - these nominal prinouts show the individual payments made.

I have screen grabs from Royal Sun Alliance showing 'Hospital Income Plan' with the inception date and Lloyds Bank Insurance Services as the Agent, and amounts paid that reconcile with my Sage Accounts.

Lloyds themselves have found the LTSB Health Insurance cover policy, but no record of payments, but have found 7 of the 60 payments made for Commercial Overdraft Repayment Insurance (CORI).

Beyond that I have no record to back up my claim that all these insurances (apart from the obvious CORI) were required to be taken out by the Lloyds Bank managers - that day in my office, the inception dates for all policies according to my Sage nominals shows them all starting within 3 months of each other.

So its my word against there's, interestingly Lombards decision was made giving me (the customer) the benefit of the doubt

roonaldo

Sorry Bloblik what is this post about? It seems you have just dug out a load of documents looking for insurance and asking for the money back alleging they are mis-sold. This isnt was mis-selling is about. Some may well have not been optional. You may see a refund on PPI if you have one but unlikely on the others.

dunstonh

I have just spoken to the ombudsman and discussed how decisions are made on claims, and I am confident I was mis-sold, no option was given and pressured selling was present.

One of those is a mis-sale reason (pressure) but the other not (alternative options). However, pressure sales are not a good complaint reason as there is almost certainly no evidence to back up your allegation. It also lacks credibility after all this time. Someone complaining within weeks of a sale saying they were pressured is credible even if the evidence doesnt really support it. Someone using that excuse 20 years later has no credibility.

So its my word against there's, interestingly Lombards decision was made giving me (the customer) the benefit of the doubt

I doubt you know what their reason was. It could be an auto payout or a sales failure at their end. Plus, if it was PPI, then they are more likely to payout. The products you are talking about are not PPI.