Claiming PPI Payment Shield

glenhswilson

Hello, I was wondering if anyone could direct me who I need to claim PPI from in regards to a paymentshield policy that was sold to us with a Nationwide mortgage through a broker Nuway Financial. Is it Nationwide or Nuway Financial? Thanks

dunstonh

You send your complaint to Nuway Financial.

However, you need to be aware of a few points first.

1 - The PPI issue is one that is not generally regarded to be an adviser failing. Just over 1% of PPI complaints are against mortgage brokers and most get rejected
2 - Paymentshield only ever did monthly premium MPPI or PPI. That is how it should be set up. Indeed they only retailed the two types of PPI that are still available today to buy as their product was good.
3 - Unlike a complaint to a bank or faceless lender where there is no consequence for the staff member that sold it, there is for a mortgage broker. This mortgage broker will be personally responsible for the complaint even if rejected. It will cost them money and anxiety. So, if this is try-it-on complaint, then consider the consequences. If it is genuine complaint then fair enough. Although the provider is good, the set up correct. So, that immediately eliminates a number of complaint reasons.
4 - Most mortgage brokers only became regulated in Jan 2005. So, they dont need to consider pre 2005 sales being complained about.

What are your complaint reasons.

magpiecottage

Nuway was an Appointed Representative of Sesame and before that of DBS Financial Management (which Sesame is now responsible for).

So a complaint should go to Sesame.

DBS actually subscribed to the Mortgage Code so it is possible that it may need to consider a complaint under that scheme for a pre 2005 sale of PPI.

Other Sesame predecessors such as Countrywide and Kestrel (which is what Sesame really is) did not, I believe.

However, you still have to prove the policy was not suitable for you. Generally that is difficult with Paymentshield as it covers a mortgage, taking down most complaint reasons. For pre 2005 cases, the standard FOS uses is simply what the Mortgage Code said about insurance. As it did not specify that the total cost including interest for single premium policies must be spelled out, FOS tends simply to look at whether the policy would actually have paid out if the complainant had lost their job or fallen ill.

Even if that does not apply, the "front loaded" argument fails with Paymentshield as it is a monthly plan.

glenhswilson

The complaint reason is that we were led to believe it wasn't optional by the broker. Thank you both for the prompt advice it has been very useful!

Nasqueron

glenhswilson wrote: »

The complaint reason is that we were led to believe it wasn't optional by the broker. Thank you both for the prompt advice it has been very useful!

unfortunately a "hearsay" complaint is the weakest going as you can't prove it.

It also depends what you mean by optional -

If you mean you had to buy it through them, if they were offering a free service then yes they can require you to buy it through them as they get commission from the insurer (the alternative is you pay for the advice).

If you mean you had to have insurance full stop, it will be a condition of the mortgage that you have to have insurance.

If you paid for mortgage advice and you were told you had to use a specific provider it could be miss-sold but how would you prove that happened?

dunstonh

The complaint reason is that we were led to believe it wasn't optional by the broker. Thank you both for the prompt advice it has been very useful!

It may not have been optional. Mortgage brokers often give free advice as long as you purchase the insurance via them. This is allowed as long as the insurance is suitable. Its a very common business model.

So, it wont have been a condition from the lender but it will likely have been a condition of the broker.

bjplfw2007

I also had a policy with payment shield at the time i was told i would be covered if i ever lost my job, unfortunately I lost my job and went to make a claim for the unemployment element of this Payment shield rejected my claim saying they didnt cover it due to it being a sales role yet I worked in a bank as a cashier nothing to do with sales side of it. When i took out the policy i was working within a sales role, would this be classed as missold against the broker and paymentshield ?

thank you in advance

dunstonh

I think you have a complaint about the claim. The sale is not the issue as Paymentshield would cover bank staff. That is unless they are sacked.

bjplfw2007

the wording said because I was in a sales role I wasn't covered therefore the policy would of been unfit for use when originally sold this ? at the time when I took out the policy I was working in a mobile phone shop selling though so surely this would be classed as missold ?

[Deleted User]

bjplfw2007 wrote: »

the wording said because I was in a sales role

How many times are you going to post about this?

November 2015
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5358826

December 2015
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5384220

January 2016
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/69874339#Comment_69874339

magpiecottage

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

How many times are you going to post about this?

November 2015
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5358826

December 2015
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5384220

January 2016
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/69874339#Comment_69874339

The answer is still the same. Complain to the insurer that the unemployment claim was unfairly rejected.

Except that not only is it bad form to keep asking the same question because you don't get the answer you want, it is also bad form to hijack somebody else's thread.