PPI Reclaiming discussion

tiggrae

BigCraigJohn wrote: »

I put in a claim with A & L basically saying that I didnt want it but was pursuaded by a pushy salesman who gave the impression i'd be refused the loan without ppi and that he didnt explain to me what was covered. Theyve come back with the fob off letter but ive since found the original documentation from the loan.
There are 1 or 2 points I feel may be valid for me to add to my claim, these being 1.I'm self employed and was at the time, now they do as with most say they cover self employed but only if you go bust, now is there anything to claim here?, only reason I didnt originally go down this route was because I thought it was ok.
2.Also I did have some other cover from another company, he asked but didnt really go into it to much as I couldnt remember what I was covered for but he noted on agreement as "has some cover but wanted more cover incase business went bust"
3.Also I had a broken leg at the time, i'd be off work 3 months on benefits, had been working minimal hours to keep things afloat, phonecalls and emails but not a lot else, it says in my contract "must of been in continous work for 6 months before applying and any pre exhisting injury would not be covered so the leg would not be covered I guess????, would the fact I hadnt been doing a lot also invalidate it????.
Sorry to waffle, just dont wanna add bits in if there not relevant so any advice as to whether I should add these into my second letter or carry on with my original claim. Thanks.

Hi there, the route I'd go down is the self employed - basically it means you're not covered for 'short-term' sickness or accident (ie you don't go bust in the short term) therefore, you 've been mis represented to as the cover you receive is different to that received by an employed person paying exactly the same premiums. Go back to them quoting their letter (but read it again - does it say you're covered as a self employed person for redundancy etc. does it mention sickness / accident) and ask if the cover is the same and if you are fully covered for both long term and shorter term sickness (ie the same as an employed person) - say that if it isn't you'll use their letter as further evidence of blatant misrepresentation and you will present it within a court of law.

DO NOT whatever you do mention the broken leg, they could use this as your not presenting all the facts and use it as a reason for cancelling the insurance and NOT paying out.

DunstanD

Hi, just an update of where I am, I've posted a letter to HSBC asking for refund, got nothing but usual fob off (you read and signed the forms etc), posted a further letter (2nd chance) and got fobbed off by someone higher up.

Now sent letter to the FOS with previous letters of mine and HSBCs for reference to see what they say...

I know I'm due as they said I needed to have the protection to get the credit, they don't admit that (though they also haven't actually denied it either - they just say 'you read the forms and signed them') but that's what the salesperson said, plus I never, ever, take payment protection, never on a loan or credit card, so I've stated that too as I wouldn't have done so this time unless it was absolutely necessary - which I was under the impression it was...

anyway.. just letting everyone know where I am and I'll post the result in the success/failure forum as I get it...

I'm not an ardent campaigner or complainer but I do object to being ripped off!!! especially by an institution I have, until now, trusted implicitly.

DD

NannyB

tiggrae wrote: »

What were your reasons for mis selling - you can either go for the mis selling angle or the fact you've paid the loan off but only received a small amount of rebate on the PPI for paying the loan off early - that's actually easier to get your money back for then any claim for mis selling.

Hi,
My reasons for mis selling were it was sold as a single premium policy with interest.. without this being known to myself without the salespeson explaining anything and implying that I had to have ppi or I would not get the loan....
Many thanks

morphette

Can someone guide me please...am stuck

Bought a car from a local garage back in 2003 and they included PPI - I paid off the car finance in full (issued by the local garage) in 2006. I had medical conditions at the time but the garage sales person did not ask me about them. Also I was strongly lead to believe that having the PPI was part of the car finance and without agreeing to it I wouldn't have been able to purchase the car.

Subsequently I wrote to the PPI issuers CLose Motor Finance, they told me take it to the dealership - so another letter was sent. They in turn said I had to take it to the actual small garage that sold me the car BUT they did point out that in 2003 when I bought the car the local garage were not regulated.

I called the FSA who were very helpful and explained everything to them as above. They said to write to the local garage and explain everything. They also explained that in my letter I should hold the garage fully responsible for the mis selling of the PPI on the loan and to mention the sales of goods act 1954 in my letter. The letter was posted.

Today I have received a letter from the local garages solicitors a firm called Lawgistics which according to their website handles legal issues for garages and car sales.

What they say is "A contract of insurance is a contract of utmost good faith, that is to say you are obliged to disclose any meterial facts which would affect the decision of the insureres in offering a policy at a particular premium. In your case, if a previous medical condition woul dhave a bearing on the insurers decision then it shoul dhave been discloed. It is not a matter of mis-selling as you allege on the part of our clients."

That's it....now what?

My argument is that had the car sales person gone through the ppi policy with me at time of purchase I would have happily raised my medical conditions to him - as it was the policy was never discussed and the x in the tick box was already filled in ready for me to sign.

Does any one have any ideas on what to send this law company back....am annoyed. In total the PPI was £1496 without interest!

Any help greatly appreciated. I can't afford to take them to the small claims court but may have to...
Thanks in advance

morphette

I have today cacnelled my PPI on a LTSB loan reducing my monthly payments from £476 to £395. However they advised that there was a rebate of PPI of £3850 due. They needed to open a new loan agreement with 68 months still remaining on my loan and they could reduce the apr from 14% to 12%. However the only condition to them being able to this was to take the rebate amount of PPI off my total outstanding loan amount. Is that legal? CAn they do that? I have already sent them a letter to claim back £1900 of PPI paid up til now - the woman didn't mention that letter - she just said someone else was looking at it.

heathy_2

Had a loan with first plus taken out March 2006 and settled in full Dec 2006. The PPI policy was for just over £13,000 and we received a rebate of just under £4000. I'm sure I have read here somewhere (although cannot find it now!) about an OFT ruling that these rebates being unfair. I think it is considering we only had the loan 9mths. Can anyone point me in the right direction please???

amanda_d_29

hello tigeraee!!

i took it out the beginning of this year.. what can i do??

BigCraigJohn

heathy wrote: »

Had a loan with first plus taken out March 2006 and settled in full Dec 2006. The PPI policy was for just over £13,000 and we received a rebate of just under £4000. I'm sure I have read here somewhere (although cannot find it now!) about an OFT ruling that these rebates being unfair. I think it is considering we only had the loan 9mths. Can anyone point me in the right direction please???

Looking at the price of the policy I imagine it was over a long time so in my eyes is not anywhere near fair. Wait for a knowledgable reply but i'd imagine you'd be entitled to far more than the measly amount they refunded.

tiggrae

morphette wrote: »

Can someone guide me please...am stuck

Bought a car from a local garage back in 2003 and they included PPI - I paid off the car finance in full (issued by the local garage) in 2006. I had medical conditions at the time but the garage sales person did not ask me about them. Also I was strongly lead to believe that having the PPI was part of the car finance and without agreeing to it I wouldn't have been able to purchase the car.

Subsequently I wrote to the PPI issuers CLose Motor Finance, they told me take it to the dealership - so another letter was sent. They in turn said I had to take it to the actual small garage that sold me the car BUT they did point out that in 2003 when I bought the car the local garage were not regulated.

I called the FSA who were very helpful and explained everything to them as above. They said to write to the local garage and explain everything. They also explained that in my letter I should hold the garage fully responsible for the mis selling of the PPI on the loan and to mention the sales of goods act 1954 in my letter. The letter was posted.

Today I have received a letter from the local garages solicitors a firm called Lawgistics which according to their website handles legal issues for garages and car sales.

What they say is "A contract of insurance is a contract of utmost good faith, that is to say you are obliged to disclose any meterial facts which would affect the decision of the insureres in offering a policy at a particular premium. In your case, if a previous medical condition woul dhave a bearing on the insurers decision then it shoul dhave been discloed. It is not a matter of mis-selling as you allege on the part of our clients."

That's it....now what?

My argument is that had the car sales person gone through the ppi policy with me at time of purchase I would have happily raised my medical conditions to him - as it was the policy was never discussed and the x in the tick box was already filled in ready for me to sign.

Does any one have any ideas on what to send this law company back....am annoyed. In total the PPI was £1496 without interest!

Any help greatly appreciated. I can't afford to take them to the small claims court but may have to...
Thanks in advance

the law is the Misrepresentation Act 1967 - you have been Negligently Misrepresented to and as such under case law the onus is upon them to prove otherwise. As you can't go to the Financial Ombudsman your only option is the Small Claims court - it isn't that expensive - £75 for your claim or £70 if you do it on-line. Good Luck

tiggrae

heathy wrote: »

Had a loan with first plus taken out March 2006 and settled in full Dec 2006. The PPI policy was for just over £13,000 and we received a rebate of just under £4000. I'm sure I have read here somewhere (although cannot find it now!) about an OFT ruling that these rebates being unfair. I think it is considering we only had the loan 9mths. Can anyone point me in the right direction please???

It's the FSA that have stated these to be Unfair under the Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 - look on their website for the document - it's the FSA website you'll need not the consumer part of it - and copy the document to them