Lloyds not giving final response until FCA release new guidance

dunstonh

but it is a fact there was an horrendous amount of policies mis-sold for various reasons of which one was not even being told what a PPI entailed.

That is actually one of the weakest complaint reasons and one that doesnt see many complaint successes. Sure, it is in the list of reasons but doesnt mean that complaints are upheld on that point. Mainly because it is very difficult to prove.

Lunatic_Flea

I hear what you say but i must of been one of the lucky ones as i was successful with my claim for £8000 and part of the claim was i was not told about what PPI was. On another point on my Wifes claim she also has savings but in their response they did not mention that. They mention she had CIP, death in service etc but not the savings. Is it worth her contacting then encase they missed this?

dunstonh

I hear what you say but i must of been one of the lucky ones as i was successful with my claim for £8000 and part of the claim was i was not told about what PPI was.

When you raise a complaint, irrespective of the reason you give, they have to review the whole sale looking at all areas. So, you could have easily as said "I don't like the font on the paperwork issued and think it was mis-sold" (extreme I know). They would then have to review the sale fully and if they found fault, they would uphold the complaint. Even though it has nothing to do with the reason given.

On another point on my Wifes claim she also has savings but in their response they did not mention that.

Savings are not an issue unless you are looking at 1-2 years worth of income. Then it can be used as a viable reason. However, even then, it can fail (mainly on MPPI or non-advised cases).

Is it worth her contacting then encase they missed this?

Were the savings greater than around two years of household income?

[Deleted User]

OP "Lunatic Flea" needs to realise that the Banks don't actually reveal the reasons they uphold a complaint. It can certainly be for exactly the reason(s) the customer gives, but it can just as easily be some other fault with the sale or even a business decision based on the amount of redress and the likely cost of contesting the complaint.

Lunatic_Flea wrote: »

On another point on my Wifes claim she also has savings but in their response they did not mention that.

Did you provide documentary proof of savings that would have easily covered the whole cost of the loan? To be honest, it doesn't sound as if they regarded this as a viable complaint reason and so chose not to comment.

WatchMan

When it comes to loans, savings or sick pay is only going to make a difference in very limited circumstances. Typically this will be where the sale was on an advised basis, the loan was for a short term and the savings or sick pay substantial.

The main reason is that the PPI's costs and the benefits it provided were more likely to have been disclosed better on a loan than on a credit card.

Also, when people are taking out loans - they normally do so to avoid using money they've saved up. Why? Because this money will be intended for something other than what ever the loan was.

This means that most people wouldn't have regarded their precious savings as something they'd be willing to eat into. So, when offered a policy (with the costs and benefits set out), they would have probably thought it a good option to take.

Lunatic_Flea

The savings was double the size of the loan (small loan) and when my Wife disclosed this they did not even ask for evidence of this.

I will pass on all your info and leave it for her to decide what to do.

[Deleted User]

Lunatic_Flea wrote: »

The savings was double the size of the loan (small loan) and when my Wife disclosed this they did not even ask for evidence of this.

They'd only ask for such evidence if it would have affected their decision. If you had had substantial savings, equivalent to two years pay or more, then it may have been different.

Lunatic_Flea wrote: »

I will pass on all your info and leave it for her to decide what to do.

She can't actually do anything until there is a formal ruling on Plevin and, even then, is still likely to be rejected.

Lunatic_Flea

Just an update. So Lloyds rejected my Wife's claim for a loan of £1000 as detailed above. She put a claim in regarding her credit card again with Lloyds at the same time providing same information like employment status, savings, CIP etc and that PPI was put on without her knowledge. She received a letter today and accepted her claim with refund to put in her account within 28 days.
Both claims against Lloyds, basically same info and circumstances provided and one claim successful and one not??

dunstonh

Lunatic_Flea wrote: »

Just an update. So Lloyds rejected my Wife's claim for a loan of £1000 as detailed above. She put a claim in regarding her credit card again with Lloyds at the same time providing same information like employment status, savings, CIP etc and that PPI was put on without her knowledge. She received a letter today and accepted her claim with refund to put in her account within 28 days.
Both claims against Lloyds, basically same info and circumstances provided and one claim successful and one not??

not same info and circumstances.

Loan PPI is single premium front loaded and a different product to credit card PPI. It has different T&C.
You dont say but it is probable that it was sold by different people on different dates using different sales processes.

Loan PPi is upheld in most cases. Credit card is closer to 50/50. The main difference is the way the products work.

robbies_gal

i got this letter or my husband did from natwest

they said his ppi was not misold but due to this new guildlines will have to wait for a dicsion

no idea what that means can someone please explain about this case theyre refering to?