PPI Reclaiming successes and failures

jollygoodjo

I had a secured loan with ocean finance and thought I had no chance of claiming any money back but finally got round to it after they wrote to me saying that I may be have a claim. I considered using a company as thought they might be able to put what was needed on the form for me to get any refund but in the end thought no harm in doing it myself. Well I nearly fell over when I received a letter saying they were going to pay me over £11,000 - woo hoo thats what I say and none of it going to another company

I also had another claim with egg finance. I downloaded the form from this website and have received a letter telling me they are going to send me a cheque for £900 !

polly5667

I thought I would share my recent and very unexpected outcome of my claim against Capital One.

Having read this site last year i put 3 claims in, MBNA, Capital One and barclaycard. MBNA were the quickest and upheld and paid up in 8 weeks to the tune of £3220. Capital One and Barclaycard both rejected it. After reading some posts on here I was unsure whether, because of their reasons, I should appeal to the FOS. Eventually and almost out of time, i thought what the hell, nothing ventured nothing gained but I did believe I was genuinely missold, not mis-bought as implied by several on here (reason on both was non-advised sale). Sent both off at beginning of Feb this year. 3 weeks ago, received a telephone call from FOS re: capital one, asking a few questions but then re contacted me to say they were upholding in favour of Capital one and their reasons were in the post. I received the letter which was factually incorrect so I appealed it. Yesterday I received another call from FOS and an ombudsman not adjudicator who had reviewed my case and was overturning their decision and was awarding in my favour.

My advise is stick to your guns if you feel you have a genuine case and fight it. I nearly gave up and didn't appeal and I know it is rare for FOS to overturn Capital One claims as they are generally quite thorough.

If you are interested why they overturned it - i initially ticked i did not want PPI when i took the card out in 2001, but 4 yrs later when my account changed to a gold card, it appeared, they claimed I requested it in a tele-marketing phone call for which they cannot give a transcript, it was the ombudsman's view that they did not make it clear that it was optional based on their practices at the time.

gannite

I was sent a form to claim PPI by HSBC filled it and sent it back. Today i got a reply offering me £2,443.25, even though i had no details to give them.:money::j

geoff1612

I (foolishly) took out a loan with Paragon and the PPI with CT Capital was included with the payments. When I paid off the loan I checked all the original documents and thought I had a good case to claim back the PPI. I wrote to Paragon who referred me to CT Capital. After about 3 months they wrote back and rejected my claim, they sent me a copy of the original phone conversation, after listening to it I noticed the seller told me the monthly repayments and he clearly said it included the PPI. I emailed CT Capital pointing this out and they still rejected my claim. I then followed Martin's advice and filled in the Ombudsman's complaint form. After 18 months and a few phone calls from the Ombudsman they found in my favour!! Last week £18,515.22 was paid into my bank account!! :j
I would just like to say, if you are thinking of giving up or not bothering......DON'T!

Also, DON'T use a claims company, they will take 20-25% of YOUR money, its easy to do it yourself.
So cheers Martin :beer: You deserve a knighthood!!

Cockney_Wideboy

-taff wrote: »

If you bought by post with no advisor present [in any sense] then you miss bought, it wasn't missold. I htink your chances are extrememly slim, but I have been proved wrong before......

Hi there - long time lurker, first time poster. An excellent site.

Their chances are not slim at all - it completely depends upon how their case is presented. My case is very similar. I was very vociferous in refuting RBS's final response and rejected (in writing) that they had carried out a "full and final" investigation into my PPI complaint. I told them that it simply was not sufficient for them to assume that the box was ticked. therefore their investigations were complete. There was an obligation for them to present all the facts to me in order for me to make an informed decision as to if PPI was right for me or not - and in this regard they failed. My suggestion to any claimant is to really hammer home the lack of cost vs benefit information. No institution during the 1990's and up to the early 2000's would have given anywhere near the required information to the consumer - and the FOS seem to believe that they should have.

Your correspondence with the institution needs to clearly state that IF you had all the required information at the point of sale/take up, you would NEVER have opted to take up PPI. Also it very much helps of you had an existing medical condiiton at the time the policy started. You may have to prove this of course, so be truthful.

The institutional "ticked box" defence is a very weak one - but its pretty much all they have in the majority of cases. The FOS position appears to be that ok the box was ticked - but WHY was it ticked? The claimant needs to justify this. I have 6 open complaints at the FOS. The first two have come back upheld - both with the usual ticked box rejections... together with each rejection point by RBS being refuted by the FOS.

The overriding message must be; if you honestly believe you have a meritous claim - NEVER accept a rejection from an institution. The day where institutions are severely penalised for these tactical rejections cannot come fast enough imo.

-taff

Their chances are slim.

If no one sold it to you, but you were presented with the facts on a piece of paper or as a pop up window, it will be miss-bought, not missold.

Otherwise Capital One [for example] would not have such a low overturn rate at the FOS because most sales were by post or over the internet.

Cockney_Wideboy

-taff wrote: »

Their chances are slim.

If no one sold it to you, but you were presented with the facts on a piece of paper or as a pop up window, it will be miss-bought, not missold.

Otherwise Capital One [for example] would not have such a low overturn rate at the FOS because most sales were by post or over the internet.

I agree that Cap 1 seem to have been doing something that other institutions were not - but the post I was replying to was relating to a complaint against RBS. And I do see a lot of similarities in the OPs' description of their complaint against my own. As I said; from what I have read, there are a lot of compainants out there that have been turned down by both institutions and the FOS because they have not articulated ther complaint effectively enough. And not played the game very well in terms of highlighting the core reasons why they believe their complaint is meritous.

Any pre-existing medical conditions?
Sick pay? On older complaints, proof of this would not be requested.
Redundancy pay? - again prrof not required of company/employer policy.
Personal resources? You will not be asked to prove this either.
Cost vs benefit? A VERY core reason in the eyes of the FOS

These are the only reasons I have needed - together with a couple of 'assertive' letters to the institution involved (RBS for one) - for the FOS to uphold my complaint and recommend the institution to settle. I am not saying for a moment that the OP have a good case - but likewise I am certainly not goign to say their chances are slim - because they simply are not.

On ALL of my claims, I ticked a box (apparently). One case - the COOP - has overturned their own decision to settle after a strong letter. Two more - MBNA and RBS Advanta - the FOS has upheld. All are the same circumstances and reasons for claiming. And if I had presented my cases to this site, I know that there woud have been many that would have advised me to give up - because the box was ticked. My own personal experiences have told me that advice like that needs a lot of thought before being given out. Just my thoughts of course....

[Deleted User]

Cockney_Wideboy wrote: »

I am not saying for a moment that the OP have a good case - but likewise I am certainly not goign to say their chances are slim -

So basically you are just hedging your bets and recommend everyone should send a complaint regardless of it's validity?

At least telling the OP that his chances are "slim" gives some indication of how the Bank will respond.

I know which advice I would have preferred for my own complaint.

Cockney_Wideboy

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

So basically you are just hedging your bets and recommend everyone should send a complaint regardless of it's validity?

At least telling the OP that his chances are "slim" gives some indication of how the Bank will respond.

I know which advice I would have preferred for my own complaint.

Then I'm afraid we will have to disagree. Because we both know there are many many claims out there with the same or similar backgrounds and evidential provision. And we both know that each case is judged individually and despite using the same basic reasons for complaint, each can have a contrasting outcome. I was merely suggesting that for someone to advise another that their chances are slim, when I personally know that they are not (based purely upon what the OP has stated on here against my own reasons for complaint).

Furthermore the OP is not interested in what the bank will say - because institutions are rejecting claims that are genuine and deserving of recompense and we all know. A rejection from the institution has very little meaning as we know. It is what the FOS will say is far more important. And all I am saying is that how you articulate your complaint is EXTREMELY important.

I am not for a moment promoting vexatious or chancing claimants; in fact I wholly discourage that practice. I merely related to the OP's reasons for their claim, which were largely the same as mine. As I have had (indicative) success with mine thus far, I cannot honestly agree with the assertion that their chances are slim. And MY advice would indeed be to progress the claim to the FOS - but put in the effort if/when you do so. Go beyond the yes/no answers. It is clear that those that appear to have put in the effort to research PPI, the very reasons why refunds of PPI are being dished out and more importantly, what the FOS viewpoint is in terms of how useful to you PPI was, are largely more successful than those that just simply complete the yes/no questionnaire. And that is not rocket science - just a little extra effort. When you receive the inevitable rejection letter from the institution - write back taking the time to answer each reason for rejection - and make the clear statement that IF PPI was explained in full, you would not have opted to tick that box. And as I said - cost/benefit - its very important in the eyes of the FOS apparently...

There have been many many instances in the last few months whereby ppl have come on here and asked what their chances are - and on the back of advice from others on here, have intimated that they will give up and accept what others are saying on here. Some of that advice I would agree with of course - but ther have been some instances where it has been clear to me that because of advice given on here (with the best of intentions of course), some people may have potentially lost out on thousands of pounds. And the OP may well decide on the back of said advice to not persue a claim that appears to be no different to the many many other successful claims out there. Do you think that is right?

I mean some of you actually subscribe to the "you ticked the box therfore you dont have a case" philosophy. That may be what you ethically believe - but in terms of advising others based upon that philosophy, you are very very wrong. As many on here testify.

Cockney_Wideboy

And again - just so you know where I am coming from...

Cockney_Wideboy wrote: »

The overriding message must be; if you honestly believe you have a meritous claim - NEVER accept a rejection from an institution. The day where institutions are severely penalised for these tactical rejections cannot come fast enough imo.

I am not hedging my bets at all. Based upon the research I have made into the reasons behind others' successful PPI claims, I too honestly believe I have perfectly genuine claims. So far RBS and MBNA et al might not agree - but the FOS does, which is far more important.