Rejecting by Ombudsman Investigator - Advice please

-taff

These were their complaint reasons, which are mostly unprovable

miffythesmartbunny wrote: »

He didn't need PPI and we believe it was missold for the following reasons:

- the policy was heavily impressed on him
- he’d explained that he was financially secure and wouldn’t benefit from the policy but was told it was part of the loan
- the policy wasn’t suitable for him as he had savings, life insurance and a permanent employment with sick pay
- the policy was sold as part and parcel of the agreement

Single premium as a complaint reason isn't in there at all.

[Deleted User]

-taff wrote: »

Single premium as a complaint reason isn't in there at all.

I'm not sure why you are going over ground already covered by the thread?
No one indicated that the OP had complained about Single Premium.

What has been established was that the Bank upheld the complaint because they identified and offered redress on the basis of Single Premium. The OP was not content with this (probably because their own reasons were rejected) and referred the complaint to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman adjudicator agreed with the Bank's offer of redress.

In recent times, Single Premium has not been the surefire guarantee of a full refund plus interest that it once was. While certainly a valid mis-selling reason, there have been numerous examples of Banks awarding only the difference in cost between Single Premium and regular monthly. This is where the insurance is identified as being otherwise valid and potentially useful.

I suppose the OP might be persuaded to appeal the paucity of redress awarded and demand full redress on the basis of Single Premium, but that's another argument entirely.

Nasqueron

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I'm not sure why you are going over ground already covered by the thread?
No one indicated that the OP had complained about Single Premium.

That was my bad, I thought as they said the bank had upheld the single premium bit and the OP said "the policy was sold as part and parcel of the agreement" that meant they had complained about single premium directly

-taff

Yup, your/you're bad.....

See what I did there?