PPI Reclaiming successes and failures

dunstonh

Either Lloyds didn't bother to check initially and lied about the application/agreement existing or it never did and once proven by me that PPI was there, they then without explanation of previous 'evidence' decided to say No mis-selling took place.

Most credit card PPI is bought post sale of the card. Often in the activation phone call. The date being the same day as the account open could be the activation date.

However, none of that matters. If there is no evidence pointing to any wrongdoing, then there is no evidence. Whether it was bought one way or the other doesnt change the lack of evidence.

As far as I am concerned they have lied either initially then corrected.

That is a strong allegation. Do you have any evidence to back that up?
It could be a clerical error. It could be lack of evidence being able to give a conclusive answer.
It could be incompetence.
You have assumed lies. Which means fraud. So, with such a strong allegation of that, what you have got?

rsspence

Perhaps I have not made this clear,


Lloyds stated they had a copy of the agreement with No PPI added, so I assume NO BOX TICKED and then signed as so. The mis-selling was regarding no knowledge at the time of PPI on the account. Surely if I had a copy of the agreement with no box ticked, then this would be proof of PPI added without consent. Therefore a justified claim.

[Deleted User]

rsspence wrote: »

so I assume NO BOX TICKED and then signed as so.

Never assume.

rsspence wrote: »

Surely if I had a copy of the agreement with no box ticked

Did you have such a copy?
Did you present this to the Bank/Ombudsman?

Even if you did, you realise that PPI can be sold after the finance is already in place? In fact, it was frequently sold as an add-on for credit cards.

As I said initially, time to move on now..

rsspence

Oh well. Seems that I will be one of the unlucky ones that get turned down where others have success with no questions asked. At least its not a massive amount.

dunstonh

Lloyds stated they had a copy of the agreement with No PPI added, so I assume NO BOX TICKED and then signed as so. The mis-selling was regarding no knowledge at the time of PPI on the account. Surely if I had a copy of the agreement with no box ticked, then this would be proof of PPI added without consent. Therefore a justified claim.

Assumptions are not evidence.

Plus, as I said earlier, most credit card PPI was added post sale and not on the application.

Oh well. Seems that I will be one of the unlucky ones that get turned down where others have success with no questions asked. At least its not a massive amount.

The credit card PPI uphold rate is about 50%.

Those that get upheld with no questions asked either have a nailed on case with strong reasons, a failure at the bank's end or an auto-payout.

Yours doesn't appear to have any strong complaint reasons and was hinging on a technicality.

rsspence

Lack of proof on my part was the factor.

solitude54321

Hi there, looking for advice regarding FNB / GE .
I had a secured loan with First National from 2000 , i have the loan application number, the loan amount , the loan account number . I,ve traced monthly payments using old bank statements and know exactly when i paid the loan off in 2003 . I,ve had no help whatsoever from GE relating too this , who still insist i must show loan agreement before they are prepared too take my complaint seriously .
I,ve hunted high and low for this too no avail .Is it possible too continue through Financial Ombudsman with the information i have ? From what i,ve read on forums , it,s not worth asking GE for my data as they will gladly take my payment anyway and have already stated they hold none of my data . Already went down the route of Land Registry , who advised me they didn,t have that document .
Can someone assist on the way forward please

Kind regards

Nasqueron

solitude54321 wrote: »

Hi there, looking for advice regarding FNB / GE .
I had a secured loan with First National from 2000 , i have the loan application number, the loan amount , the loan account number . I,ve traced monthly payments using old bank statements and know exactly when i paid the loan off in 2003 . I,ve had no help whatsoever from GE relating too this , who still insist i must show loan agreement before they are prepared too take my complaint seriously .
I,ve hunted high and low for this too no avail .Is it possible too continue through Financial Ombudsman with the information i have ? From what i,ve read on forums , it,s not worth asking GE for my data as they will gladly take my payment anyway and have already stated they hold none of my data . Already went down the route of Land Registry , who advised me they didn,t have that document .
Can someone assist on the way forward please

Kind regards

A SAR is free since GDPR. If they have no data left then not sure what you expect to receive?



GE want proof you had PPI as they have none themselves.


The FOS will not make GE give you money for a PPI policy that you can't prove you had or paid.

[Deleted User]

solitude54321 wrote: »

I had a secured loan with First National from 2000 , i have the loan application number, the loan amount , the loan account number . I,ve traced monthly payments using old bank statements and know exactly when i paid the loan off in 2003 . I,ve had no help whatsoever from GE relating too this ,

What "help" did you want or expect?

You are accusing them of mis-selling PPI, but nothing in your arsenal of evidence actually relates to PPI. The question remains, regardless of whether your loan undoubtedly exists, did you actually have PPI?

If neither you, nor the Bank, can evidence any insurance policy then any complaint you might make is already over.

The Ombudsman cannot force the Bank to refund PPI for which their are no records.

Sorry.

solitude54321

Many thanks for the replies most appreciated. I guess I need too find the loan agreement The last PPI claim I have too deal with. I obtained refunds with far less hassle than this & with far less information than what I have for this one The search continues.