Reclaiming Santander PaymentCare

davecarr2000

Hi,

This is regarding my GF current policy with Santander Paymentcare.
We were looking through our finances, and I noticed this payment, when I asked she wasn't sure what it was for but she thinks it's something to do with the mortgage, which started the alarms bells ringing.

I phoned them and complained, over 3 points.
1. My girlfriend didn't know what she was signing in 2009.
2. The amount she was covered for is only 50% max of her salary, which is more than 33% less than the total mortgage, ie if she did have a valid claim, she would have to find money elsewhere to pay the rest of the mortgage.
3. In 2012 we remortgaged, adding myself to the house deeds and mortgage, and was not asked if we wanted to change or cancel it (PPI, (not that I wanted it)).

They replied in writing with a final letter but only to point 3, as if I had not mentioned point 1 or 2.

I have managed to get the 01 telephone number for the right dept, as the number on saynoto0870 put me through to santander somewhere, and they eventually found the dept that had refused the claim.

I'm to ring them back regarding not listening to the other (I believe) valid claims.

Do you think I have a valid claim?
Any pointers you can give me to help speed up he process, like cutting through BS/red tape/waffle/spiel.

Things to consider
Prior to 2009 my GF wasn't working, but her Husband had PPI, and we received a letter from Santander saying he might have been mis-sold PPI from paymentcare.
When I spoke to Paymentcare the first time, they said they stopped selling PPI with mortgages because of the 'whole' PPI issues that have happened, which is why I wasn't offered it.

dunstonh

1. My girlfriend didn't know what she was signing in 2009.

That is a bit worrying fro an adult buying a house. However, its a weak complaint reason as anyone can say that after the event and it is actually unlikely in 2009 (post regulation sale should have a statement of demands and needs)

2. The amount she was covered for is only 50% max of her salary, which is more than 33% less than the total mortgage, ie if she did have a valid claim, she would have to find money elsewhere to pay the rest of the mortgage.

The Govt does not want people to be better off out of work than in work. So, there are limits on what you can cover yourself for. There is also the possibility that budget restraints existed and your GF decided to only cover 50%. This will be detailed in the statement of demands and needs.

3. In 2012 we remortgaged, adding myself to the house deeds and mortgage, and was not asked if we wanted to change or cancel it (PPI, (not that I wanted it)).

That is not a mis-sale reason. The person that sold it in 2009 wouldnt know what you were going to do 3 years later. Did you ask them if it should be kept, changed or cancelled?

Do you think I have a valid claim?

We dont have access to the files and documentation. Reason 1 is easily rejected. Reason 2 may be a policy constraint or a decision made by her at the time. Reason 3 is not a mis-sale reason as it happened 3 years after the event and it is your duty to control your own products.

Statistically, most MPPI complaints are rejected. However, we really cant give you much more than that other than point out potential issues.

Prior to 2009 my GF wasn't working, but her Husband had PPI, and we received a letter from Santander saying he might have been mis-sold PPI from paymentcare.

That is just a CCL. It doesnt mean anything.

When I spoke to Paymentcare the first time, they said they stopped selling PPI with mortgages because of the 'whole' PPI issues that have happened, which is why I wasn't offered it.

Also irrelevant. Today, there are only really two types of PPI still retailed. Mortgage PPi is one of those. When the banks started to pull out of financial advice a number of years back, this meant they stopped offering a number of products. However, that does not mean the products were not still available via advice distribution channels or DIY channels.

roonaldo

davecarr2000 wrote: »

1. My girlfriend didn't know what she was signing in 2009.

She should have known because this is a monthly paid regulated insurance, she would have received a Key Facts, signed a application form and direct debit form. She paid for it every month. Lets be honest she knew about it.

2. The amount she was covered for is only 50% max of her salary, which is more than 33% less than the total mortgage, ie if she did have a valid claim, she would have to find money elsewhere to pay the rest of the mortgage.

It doesn't matter what percentage of her salary it is. PPI covers a fixed amount each month. Why is it only covering 67% of the mortgage payment, is this because the adviser took into account sick pay? she had an existing policy? If there is a reason then this isnt mis-selling. You need to find out why.

3. In 2012 we remortgaged, adding myself to the house deeds and mortgage, and was not asked if we wanted to change or cancel it (PPI, (not that I wanted it)).

This isnt mis-selling. They are not obliged to do anything at all.

There is nothing wrong with monthly mortgage PPI.

davecarr2000

Lets be honest she knew about it.

I was being honest. When I asked her she didn't say 'oh that's the PPI I signed up for in 2009' her exact words were 'I don't know, I think it has something to do with the mortgage though'

You need to find out why

Santander kindly sent us their latest copy of Paymentcare policy.
In there it states you can choose which percentage of the policy covers whom, so I could have 80% cover, and she could have 20% if we wanted, as long as they aren't paying out more than 50% of that persons gross salary.

With this being in her sole name she is getting 100% cover, but the 50% max gross salary still applies. So because of her wage/salary, and their policy she will never have been covered for the full mortgage amount.

I don't know if they took Sick pay into account, it would only be SSP, but as I said above the 50% rule dictates what she can receive, obviously that gives a max payout, and sets the premium amounts. Like you said I need to find out if they took into account Sick Pay. I won't feed them the words, they need to investigate, and come to that conclusion, then I need to work out how much she would get with the PPI and SSP, I still dont think it would be enough, but not 100% sure.

The final decision letter we received only had point 3, I did talk in length with them about the other points, but they didn't mention them in the letter.

But going back to point 3, PPI is optional, they say it is the policyholders responsibility, but they do try and push house insurance, and life insurance, when remortgaging, so why not mention PPI, even just to say contact paymentcare to check you have enough cover. They took point 3 the wrong way, they thought I was upset I wasn't offered it, my point was if they offered it in 2009 why stop now, they said it was because of the PPI scandals, so was it 'dodgy in 2009'.

magpiecottage

davecarr2000 wrote: »

Santander kindly sent us their latest copy of Paymentcare policy.
In there it states you can choose which percentage of the policy covers whom, so I could have 80% cover, and she could have 20% if we wanted, as long as they aren't paying out more than 50% of that persons gross salary.

With this being in her sole name she is getting 100% cover, but the 50% max gross salary still applies. So because of her wage/salary, and their policy she will never have been covered for the full mortgage amount.

That is not correct.


The reason for the 50% maximum is so that a person has some incentive to return to work.

However, a working person has to pay Income Tax and National Insurance - as well as commuting costs.

PPI payments are not subject to either and by definition, a person who is not working has nowhere to commute to.

I think, too, that Roonaldo is right. Your girlfriend knew about it because in 2009 it would have been more or less impossible to sign up to without knowing. You needed to complete a direct debit and also received a "Key Facts" document.

That is not to say she has not since forgotten but subsequent amnesia does not constitute a reason for a missale - although I suppose it might be a reason for a claim!

I don't know if they took Sick pay into account, it would only be SSP, but as I said above the 50% rule dictates what she can receive, obviously that gives a max payout, and sets the premium amounts. Like you said I need to find out if they took into account Sick Pay. I won't feed them the words, they need to investigate, and come to that conclusion, then I need to work out how much she would get with the PPI and SSP, I still dont think it would be enough, but not 100% sure.

The final decision letter we received only had point 3, I did talk in length with them about the other points, but they didn't mention them in the letter.

But going back to point 3, PPI is optional, they say it is the policyholders responsibility, but they do try and push house insurance, and life insurance, when remortgaging, so why not mention PPI, even just to say contact paymentcare to check you have enough cover. They took point 3 the wrong way, they thought I was upset I wasn't offered it, my point was if they offered it in 2009 why stop now, they said it was because of the PPI scandals, so was it 'dodgy in 2009'.[/QUOTE]

davecarr2000

That is not correct.

What isn't correct? the above info is from their documents.
I put in a scenario for a couple having the policy, which is what they do, the 'Monthly Benefit' is 100%, and you decide who gets what %. ie 50/50 or 80/20, probably depending on who earns the most.
In my Girfriends case she is the only one named, so gets 100% of the 'Monthly benefit', however this benefit cannot be greater than 50% of the claiming persons salary, her salary.
As for the tax issue, my Girlfriend doesn't and didn't pay NI, and I think only paid a small amount of Tax, possibly in the 10% bracket, I think it was still in then, as she didn't earn enough.

The 'Monthly Benefit' as Santander call it, is their payout of the mortgage, the MPPI premiums, buildings and contents insurance, and any linked life insurance. The total of all those 4/5 items, which were all provided by Santander therefore expensive, are far greater than the cover they provide, because of the 50% rule.

I'm not saying they should pay more than 50%, I'm saying the cover is not enough, if it was to cover her properly, because if she claimed, she wouldn't be able to meet the mortgage payments, and all the associated mortgage/house insurances.

I do appreciate your time taken to reply, you have made me refer back to their document a few times, and now I realise they have definitely mis-sold it, because the monetary value doesn't cover what their policy says it covers.

Tomorrow I'll get her 2009 statements, and get the exact figures, then get on the phone to them, I love arguing on the phone, the best bit is when you repeat yourself, until they 'get it'.

haras_nosirrah

Must be something wrong with the maths somewhere

If the mortgage cover was for 50% of her salary as a single applicant and this was 33% less than the mortgage payment then the mortgage payment would be 83% of her salary. No lender would lend that much against her income especially if her income was so low that she barely paid tax.

E.g if she earned £1000 a month then her mortgage would be £833

Something not right as 50% of her income would normally be more than enough to cover a mortgage payment due to affordability

davecarr2000

There is nothing wrong with the math, although I haven't looked at exact figures, the mortgage payment is roughly what we pay now, and my Girlfriend earns only a little more than she did then (in the pennies). She paid a little tax then, no more than a few pound, now she pays nothing.

They have got her to pay for this cover, but it doesn't cover enough money to pay the mortgage bills.

If it was a basic PPI policy insuring a sum, and paying out a set amount, to contribute towards costs then that would be that, but it is a MPPI to cover the mortgage, the MPPI payments, house insurance and life insurance, and it is supposed to cover the lot, and it doesn't.

Looking at the policy it states Monthly benefit, the amount you want to be paid, and monthly repayment, which is all mortgage related items as above. According to the policy, the monthly benefit should be at least equal to the monthly repayment, if not higher.
Im my Girlfriends case it is not even equal, because the policy only pays out 50% of gross salary

haras_nosirrah

What was her income at the time, what was the mortgage amount, what was the mortgage monthly payment?

With mppi you can usually either have it for the monthly mortgage or you can have it for the monthly mortgage + 25% to cover bills.

davecarr2000

What was her income at the time, what was the mortgage amount, what was the mortgage monthly payment?

I'm not going to give that information, as it is private.

With mppi you can usually either have it for the monthly mortgage or you can have it for the monthly mortgage + 25% to cover bills.

As I said previously, their policy states that the 'monthly repayment' includes the monthly mortgage, the monthly MPPI, buildings and contents insurance, and life assurance.

Believe me when I say the monthly sum assured doesn't cover the bills, santander will have known this, or should have known this in 2009 when they sold the policy, but they sold it anyway.

The Agent will have made sure the life assurance cover the value of the mortgage, the house insurance had the right rebuild cost etc, so why no make sure the MPPI covers the bills.

dunstonh

The Agent will have made sure the life assurance cover the value of the mortgage, the house insurance had the right rebuild cost etc, so why no make sure the MPPI covers the bills.

Maybe they did. If you look at the statement of demands and needs that will have what was recommended and why and if it doesn't meet the mortgage need, it will say way (such as not willing to pay the whole premium required)