Financial Ombudsman rejection (sort of!)

cazzam

Hi, this is my first thread so please bear with me on this one, its quite long!
My claim for ppi on a credit card was rejected by the Halifax earlier this year, so I sent it through to the Financial Ombudsman. In the letter I received from the FO said that as my PPI was sold to me before Jan 2005 - the date all businesses selling insurance became regulated - they can't consider my complaint!
The background to my complaint was in 2004 I requested a credit card from the Halifax, they told me I needed insurance to cover the repayments, I was not told this was optional. I paid this for 4 years then cancelled it when I realised it wasn't mandatory. Recently I heard others had claimed for money back so decided to send a claim off to Halifax..
I rang the FO, as in their letter they also said there were some circumstances in which they were able to consider the complaint one being "if the business selling your policy could have been acting on behalf of another business" The FO has now told me to contact the Halifax Insurance underwriters - St Andrews Insurance - now Llloyds TSB to ask what other parties were involved in the sale and try to contact them about it!
I would like to ask if anyone else has:
1/ any advice 2/ been down this route 3 / was successful and if you think there is any hope of me getting this money at all!

Thanks for reading

dunstonh

Strange rejection and doesnt sound right.

Technically, it is correct in terms of dates. However, it would not apply to banks selling their own products.

magpiecottage

I suggest you return to the Financial Ombudsman Service and remind it that Halifax was subject to its voluntary jurisdiction in 2004 so that it can consider your complaint.

If it refuses, say that you would like an ombudsman to make a decision on jurisdiction.

[Deleted User]

Odd complaint rejection reason, this. Definitely something missing from what the OP is telling us..

cazzam

I obviously can't put the complete replies I had to these claims as the letters are too long but one thing I omitted to say was that I originally sent a claim to Halifax in Oct 2014 the result of that was - if I had been aware the PPI was optional, my decision to buy the policy would not have changed! This letter came from Halifax PPI customer service. I disagreed with this but then had some family matters to deal with so I didn't deal with it straight away. Then this year I saw a Martin Lewis show saying you can put another claim in even if the period had gone past 6 months. So I then sent it again to Halifax. This reply came from St Andrews Insurance, Halifax (same address) saying they haven't found sufficient evidence to agree that the PPI policy was mis-sold. His points were 1. not having sufficient savings which could protect the payments - 2. No sufficient employee benefits to protect the payments 3. No foreseeable events at time of sale which would have affected the suitability of the policy 4. no exclusions 5. no pre-existing medical conditions 5. level of cover was appropriate for needs 6. no evidence to show couldn't afford PPI. However it does say they are keeping case open as they need to investigate if the level of commission was disclosed, once the Financial conduct authority have implemented these rules.
Another paragraph in the Ombudsman letter says - "There are some circumstances where we are able to consider complaints where policies were sold before Jan 2005 - for example, where a bank or building society was responsible for the sale. If you think the business selling your policy could have been acting on behalf of another business, you could try getting in touch with that other business about your complaint. if you are not happy with the response you receive, you can contact us again and we will look into whether we can help"
Should I just wait and hope the Halifax come up with something, eventually or try contacting the CFS team Lloyds TSB General insurance to ask if other parties were involved with the sale of the PPI, which is what was suggested to me by the FO.
This is now so confusing I feel like just giving it all up, but I feel I am in the right and it annoys me that there's people that have managed so easily to get this payment from the PPI without all this hassle.

[Deleted User]

cazzam wrote: »

This is now so confusing I feel like just giving it all up

You'll have to, I'm afraid, your complaint ended in 2014 when you failed to pursue your claim after the initial rejection.

Unless you have very compelling evidence not in your original complaint, then attempting to have your complaint re-opened is a waste of time.

I really don't know why Martin Lewis advised rejected claimants to re-apply.

dunstonh

Then this year I saw a Martin Lewis show saying you can put another claim in even if the period had gone past 6 months.

He was wrong.

Another paragraph in the Ombudsman letter says - "There are some circumstances where we are able to consider complaints where policies were sold before Jan 2005 - for example, where a bank or building society was responsible for the sale.

That does not apply in this case. It is a generic reason that can apply to some but not to yours. However, in your case, your 6 months ended in 2014/15.

Should I just wait and hope the Halifax come up with something, eventually or try contacting the CFS team Lloyds TSB General insurance to ask if other parties were involved with the sale of the PPI, which is what was suggested to me by the FO.

That does not work with bank products.

cazzam

Then why did The Halifax not reject my 2nd claim? They didn't even mention it in their letter, just said they have reviewed it again. Also the time period was not even mentioned by the Ombudsman as one of their reasons for not considering my complaint!

[Deleted User]

cazzam wrote: »

Then why did The Halifax not reject my 2nd claim? They didn't even mention it in their letter, just said they have reviewed it again. Also the time period was not even mentioned by the Ombudsman as one of their reasons for not considering my complaint!

Halifax DID reject your complaint again, otherwise why did you go to the Ombudsman?

This whole thread appears terribly confused.

cazzam

I actually meant why didn't the Halifax reject my second claim due to the time lapse! Yes the whole thing is confusing that's why I posted it here! I don't know the financial and legal processes but from what I've heard here both Halifax and FO have not been straight with me.

magpiecottage

cazzam wrote: »

I actually meant why didn't the Halifax reject my second claim due to the time lapse! Yes the whole thing is confusing that's why I posted it here! I don't know the financial and legal processes but from what I've heard here both Halifax and FO have not been straight with me.

Your original rejection would have included an explanation that you could go to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you remained dissatisfied with the response. It would have included the contact address and telephone number.

It would also have told you clearly about the six month time limit.

A leaflet published by the Financial Ombudsman Service explaining the process would have been included.

So why did you not adhere to that limit?

It seems, though, that there is a possibility that the commission on the plan may be excessive. If so, you may get a partial refund. Don't hold your breath for this. It is likely to take many months or even years to resolve.