We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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!

PPI Confusion

Options
I have written to a number of lenders using the reclaim letter guidance. I have now received responses from them all the 1st from alloyed Bank advising me that if I want to apply formally under Data protection (fee £10). Is this standard?
Another was in regards to Abbey National (Santander) who sent a response asking me to provide more details as I didn't have the account number. I telephoned them and a very helpful advisor completed the required information over the phone. I have now received letters from Santander advising they will not be upholding my complaint. They have also enclosed the form I completed over the phone, and Ombudsman info.
Some of the accounts date back to the 1990's, and I don't have all the account numbers. I would appreciate advice as to my next steps.

Comments

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 26,612 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    While Banks are generally co-operative when customers enquire about old accounts and PPI, if a thorough search of archives is needed then a formal Data Subject Access Request (SAR) might well be required. This does indeed cost £10 for each lender.

    However, if the records have been deleted due to the time elapsed, and you have no documents yourself, then your complaints are over before they've begun.
  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 10,657 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    With Abbey, unless you have some substantial new evidence then your only options are to accept the rejection or refer to the Ombudsman - your letter explains this. Unless you feel the bank have made an error based on the evidence you provided then don't expect too much and you may get lucky at the FOS - a he said/she said case isn't likely to succeed on that point alone

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.