Plevin - excuse to delay?

BarnesS_2

I have 4 ongoing complaints to Nawest/RBS for misold PPI. I should have had a decision by this week, however, I've just been told that I will not receive a decision until "Spring 2016" at the earliest as my case is "Plevin - affected". I understand this is something relating to the Supreme Court decision and a subsequent enquiry into the handling of PPI claims - which will most likely lead to a deadline for claiming etc..
As my claims are quite old (one of them goes back to 1998), I am concerned this "Plevin" will be used as an excuse to stall my complaint for long enough for a ruling to be made that claims must be made within a particular timeframe (no doubt shorter than mine!). Any advice would be welcome, the complaint handlers are saying there's nothing I, nor them, can do as "we are waiting an outcome of the enquiry". Surely not all PPI claims are being delayed in this way?

dunstonh

Plevin - excuse to delay?

yes. It is a valid reason to delay

I understand this is something relating to the Supreme Court decision and a subsequent enquiry into the handling of PPI claims - which will most likely lead to a deadline for claiming etc..

No. Its a specific court case with a resulted in redress due to the size of commission taken.

Surely not all PPI claims are being delayed in this way?

They are not.

Basically, if there is reason to uphold the complaint under normal circumstances, then the complaints handler should pay the redress now. However, if there is no reason to uphold the complaint (i.e. no wrongdoing found) but the case falls within the plevin proposals from the FCA, then they should hold on that point and pay the redress once the FCA rules are formalised. This is effectively a small refund of commission above 50%. Not a refund of premiums.

So, for your case to be put on hold for the FCA Plevin rules to be finalised would suggest your complaint has been rejected but you are likely to receive an amount for excess commission over 50% (plus interest).

BarnesS_2

That is very helpful - I'm due to speak with a manager at PPI complaints at RBS this afternoon so that knowledge is very useful. Do you suggest I ask for more detail on why my complaint is viewed as relevant to Plevin? i.e. has my complaint not been upheld in first instance?

dunstonh

Do you suggest I ask for more detail on why my complaint is viewed as relevant to Plevin? i.e. has my complaint not been upheld in first instance?

You can do as Plevin only comes into play with complaints that have found to have no other wrongdoing. The FCA guidelines on this require just one failure to be identified. So, if they had found anything they wouldnt need to apply Plevin.

magpiecottage

dunstonh wrote: »

You can do as Plevin only comes into play with complaints that have found to have no other wrongdoing. The FCA guidelines on this require just one failure to be identified. So, if they had found anything they wouldnt need to apply Plevin.

Essentially, if it is found that you should never have had the policy in the first place, the whole thing is unwound. That means all premiums are refunded. Since that would include any commission paid from those premiums, Plevin has no impact because anything it says you should get back will be refunded anyway.

If you do only get a Plevin refund you can still go to FOS. However, there is a small risk that FOS may conclude that you are not even entitled to that.

BarnesS_2

Thanks magpiecottage - also very helpful.
I had a very difficult conversation with a senior manager at RBS this afternoon who tells me that they have decided that the PPI that I didn't know I had was not miss-sold therefore Plevin may apply. I, of course, disagree and have asked them to provide me with the evidence that supports their decision. My concern is that I cannot take this to the Ombudsman until their final decision is made (including the Plevin bit) which may indeed take MONTHS!! Any advice?

dunstonh

I, of course, disagree and have asked them to provide me with the evidence that supports their decision.

They do not have to provide evidence to support their decision. Where there is an allegation of wrongdoing, there has to be evidence to support it. Not evidence to show there was no wrongdoing.

My concern is that I cannot take this to the Ombudsman until their final decision is made (including the Plevin bit) which may indeed take MONTHS!! Any advice?

On the upside, any delay they cause will result in you getting more interest and 8% simple is better than most banks.