We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
MSE News: PPI victims handing over £5bn to claims sharks - reclaim £1,000s yourself f
Legacy_user
Posts: 0 Newbie
Opportunistic claims management companies are siphoning off up to a third of compensation cash paid to consumers...
Read the full story:
'PPI victims handing over £5bn to claims sharks - reclaim £1,000s yourself for free'
Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
'PPI victims handing over £5bn to claims sharks - reclaim £1,000s yourself for free'
Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
0
Comments
-
As these people were stupid enough to sign up for PPI they didn't want/need in the first place, it's barely a surprise that they then choose to use a PPI reclaim company that they don't require.
What's next?
"Have you been conned into using a PPI reclaim company? If so text ..."I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
Literally millions of people were systematically mis-sold this insurance, are you really saying they are all "stupid"?
The truth is that, at best, PPI was an expensive commodity with little return for customers. At worst, it was completely useless. The blame for the scandal does not lie with "stupid" customers, however...
Regardless, the point of the article is to raise awareness that no one has to employ an expensive "representative" to put a stamp on the envelope containing a PPI complaint.0 -
Moneyineptitude wrote: »The truth is that, at best, PPI was an expensive commodity with little return for customers. At worst, it was completely useless.
Yet still they bought it.
Then they got a chance to claim it all back but instead gave a third of it away for no good reason.
You may think that this isn't stupid, but I very much think it is.
Perhaps we just need to agree to differ over what's smart and what's stupid.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
More than 12 million people who've been mis-sold PPI have been paid over £22 billion in compensation since April 2011.
Is this 12 million people, or 12 million claims? Given the number of people that have claimed against multiple lenders, I'm not convinced the quoted figure is correct.
I'd also dispute that they have all been missold. Going by reports on here a good number of claims are paid out on the vaguest of information, it's fair to say that tested in a civil court the same claims would fail for lack of evidence.0 -
I read somewhere that a large number of claims were received from people who bought PPI and had then also successfully claimed on this insurance!I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »I read somewhere that a large number of claims were received from people who bought PPI and had then also successfully claimed on this insurance!
There have been plenty who according to their complaint letters (which are usually CMC ones) did not know they had the insurance or were not eligible for it and yet had successfully claimed on it.
Truthfully, the vast majority who were genuinely missold were sorted out a long time ago. The majority of complainants nowadays have bee browbeaten into it by CMC cold callers and don't actually have a clue whether they were missold PPI or not.0 -
I was looking at a complaint on Thursday evening that was submitted to NatWest by these idiots.Insider101 wrote: »There have been plenty who according to their complaint letters (which are usually CMC ones) did not know they had the insurance or were not eligible for it and yet had successfully claimed on it.
Truthfully, the vast majority who were genuinely missold were sorted out a long time ago. The majority of complainants nowadays have bee browbeaten into it by CMC cold callers and don't actually have a clue whether they were missold PPI or not.
They said that NatWest sold a mortgage in 2005 and added a single PPI premium to it.
Like other mortgage providers, NatWest (and the rest of RBS group) does not do this because it reduces the equity in the property and thus increases the risk to the lender.
In this case, though, the consumers did not take out a mortgage with NatWest in 2005. LFS Claims seem to have chosen this date because it is when regulation of general insurance started.
A mortgage did start in 1997 but NatWest did not arrange PPI for it - nor did the broker who sold the mortage.
Perhaps LFS Claims would like to come here and explain why they chose to make a fraudulent complaint.
If they do, I am afraid I will not have time to read it as I will be looking to the sky, watching the wonderful aerobatic display by Pinky and Perky.0 -
What percentage are from people who didn't have PPI and didn't realise you needed to have bought it to be able to reclaim money?I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
The banks won't like it if this Which? proposal is adopted:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/13/force-banks-to-pay-for-ppi-sharks-fees-watchdog-demands/Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.0 -
The banks won't like it if this Which? proposal is adopted:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/13/force-banks-to-pay-for-ppi-sharks-fees-watchdog-demands/
it wont be adopted. It is a crazy proposal.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards