Mbna Inconsistency

brum1968

HI
Ive had a claim on old mbna credit card that was settled pre 2009 rejected, due to timebar.
Ive had a second claim against a credit card that was passed from alliance and leicester, then Santander and ultimately ended with Mbna. Even though this was ended in 2004, it was upheld.
Two questions, how can they time bar one and not the other.
Secondly are Mbna known to be inconsistent.

Nearlyold

Without knowing the rationale for applying the time bar its difficult to comment, what did you give as your complaint reasons and assuming they've used the 3 year time bar, what did they say it was that you should have reasonably known about more than 3 years ago.

brum1968

Their reason for the timebar was that I should have noticed the ppi on all my card statements. Compllaint reasons I was not made aware that the cover would only pay for a percentage of the balance, even though i was employed with 6 months full pay and six months half pay as sickness cover, I also had savings. Im not sure what was on the agreement, as its so long ago, but im not sure they will find out either. My thoughts are this claim could be quite large, so I guess the time bar rejection. But the second claim was upheld, using the same reasons.

dunstonh

Statements are not enough to trigger the time bar. However, a reminder letter stating the insurance you have and a summary of benefits should be enough.

brum1968

I never had any communication whilst i had card, apart from when i signed up for card.
why not time bar the second claim thougn as it was 2004.

dunstonh

why not time bar the second claim thougn as it was 2004.

Could be many reasons. Different period, different distribution/version.

Impossible to guess.

I never had any communication whilst i had card,

They would often look like marketing inserts.

brum1968

The first claim is now with Fos, but they need to seek permission from Mbna to look at case, according to them.

magpiecottage

brum1968 wrote: »

The first claim is now with Fos, but they need to seek permission from Mbna to look at case, according to them.

This is as a result of a recent change in the rules. From 9 July this year, a business must indicate in its final response if it will permit FOS to look at a complaint which is made beyond any time limit.

If it was issued before then, they did not have have to specify. So if a final response issued before then now goes to FOS and any limit has expired, it will ask the firm concerned if it is willing waive the time limit. If it says it will not then FOS can only look at it if it believes there are exceptional circumstances that mean it should overrule.