PPI Nationwide Advice required

Abbottw

We discovered that we had been paid PPI on a loan we took out with the Nationwide in 2000 (we had no idea we had taken it out) we went through the normal channels - Nationwide reject our claim - went to the ombudsman and they upheld the banks rejection. It seems so unfair to me that we were missold the policy as we did not need it we were both in good jobs that had we had gone on long term sick we would have received full pay (we have never been on long term sick) the ombudsman said that the nationwide did not mislead us, they said that we were presented with the option and we put a tick in the yes box, they said once we had done that N/wide had drawn up the agreement explaining all the insurance options in full what we were buying. I said that we were just told to sign here, here and here which we did do (in them days we had no idea about PPI and we just wanted the loan ) and it was signed. The ombudsman said There was no evidence you were being given any financial advice in this sale, so it would still have been up to you to decide whether PPI was right for you or not. What I cant get through to them is if it had been explained to us we would have said we did not need it, but it wasn't. They closed with I can't fairly say that Nationwide has done anything wrong here, it looks to me as though you were given a clear choice in this sale and that you decided to buy the insurance that was offered to you. So wrong, we were not given the choice but it comes down to who they believe and its not us. We have to respond by 2 June, my question is, is it worth it, I know we were missold it but the Ombudsman is believing the bank. Thank you for your time

Nearlyold

Is that an Adjudicators response or from an Ombudsman? If the former you can ask for it to be passed to the latter for a final judgement. If it's already a decision from a Ombudsman then you can ask him to reconsider in your response by 2nd June based on why you think he/she is incorrect, after that if the Ombudsman still goes against you its game over.

Alice_Walker

The Ombudsman says this was a non advised sale. Do you disagree with this?

dunstonh

t seems so unfair to me that we were missold the policy as we did not need it we were both in good jobs that had we had gone on long term sick we would have received full pay (we have never been on long term sick)

Insurance is about what could happen. Just because you were not long term sick, does not mean anything.

the ombudsman said that the nationwide did not mislead us, they said that we were presented with the option and we put a tick in the yes box, they said once we had done that N/wide had drawn up the agreement explaining all the insurance options in full what we were buying.

This means it was a non-advised sale. i.e. you chose whether to have it or not.

I said that we were just told to sign here, here and here which we did do (in them days we had no idea about PPI and we just wanted the loan ) and it was signed. The ombudsman said There was no evidence you were being given any financial advice in this sale, so it would still have been up to you to decide whether PPI was right for you or not. What I cant get through to them is if it had been explained to us we would have said we did not need it, but it wasn't.

You cant prove what you are alleging. Anyone can say that after the event. Whether the same was genuine or not. They cant just accept that. The available evidence has to point towards a wrongdoing.

my question is, is it worth it, I know we were missold it but the Ombudsman is believing the bank. Thank you for your time

The ombudsman will be believing the bank because there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. your complaint is very weak and appears to have no supporting evidence. If you refer it to an ombudsman, what will be the basis? (repeating the same argument rarely works. So, what new evidence can you introduce)