PPI paid in 2004 - used a broker, can I claim

triplesilk

I wonder if anyone can give me a steer.

I took a 5-year mortgage out in 2004 for £50k on a house that cost £250k. I used a broker (JBM Mortgages) and queried the PPI cost that appeared on a form, suggesting that this was inappropriate for a 5 year loan for 25% of the house value. I was told I wouldn't get the mortgage otherwise and it was just part of the process.

The mortgage was with Abbey, now Santander, who say they have no record of PPI (through a legal re-claim company). All I have is a note I took of the Mortgage broker and provider.

Is there anything I can do? If the answer is no then fair enough, but I'd like to claim on general principle if possible as thinking PPI is appropriate in this case is just crazy.

Thanks in advance!

dunstonh

Most mortgage brokers only become regulated in January 2005 and only have to consider complaints about sales made after that date.

Is there anything I can do? If the answer is no then fair enough, but I'd like to claim on general principle if possible as thinking PPI is appropriate in this case is just crazy.

Nothing you have said suggests that MPPI is inappropriate. If it had been single premium MPPI then yes it would be monthly is fine for a 5 year debt.

triplesilk

Thanks - looks like I'll have to give up them.

Just for interest though, I don't understand the last point. As it happens, the mortgage payments were not a big part of my salary (and if I lost my job, then I'd almost certainly have been paid off enough to cover the debt in any case) but in any case, if I have a house worth £250k and no debt then couldn't I easily have borrowed cash to cover the repayments?

[Deleted User]

triplesilk wrote: »

but in any case, if I have a house worth £250k and no debt then couldn't I easily have borrowed cash to cover the repayments?

Not if you've just lost your job, no.

triplesilk

Why couldn't I easily get a re-mortgage? The amount left would be less than 20% of the value of the house.

-taff

Because no-one will give you a mortgage unless you have a job.


You need some kind of repayment vehicle if you are going to borrow money.

dunstonh

triplesilk wrote: »

Why couldn't I easily get a re-mortgage? The amount left would be less than 20% of the value of the house.

Equity does not pay the bills. Income does.

triplesilk

But I can change the equity into income surely? I mean, sell the house and rent somewhere or buy a smaller place etc?

In any case, my situation made it the worst value insurance imaginable, that's why it irks me. If I lost my main job, then my firm (who are huge) would have paid me off for £50k at least in all likelihood, plus I had a second income that was considerable, plus I had plenty of cash left over as I kept some back to renovate the house, plus my parents would have lent me £50k at the drop of a hat if I needed it, plus I was highly employable at that time so would in all likelihood have quickly found a job if I needed to. These are all things that I would have explained to the broker had they not said that I had no option but to take the insurance.

-taff

triplesilk wrote: »

But I can change the equity into income surely? I mean, sell the house and rent somewhere or buy a smaller place etc?

You could have, but that was a situation that didn't happen.

triplesilk wrote: »

If I lost my main job, then my firm (who are huge) would have paid me off for £50k at least in all likelihood,

Not guaranteed. They could have gone into liquidation and paid out nothing.

triplesilk wrote: »

plus I had a second income that was considerable,

This you should have mentioned.

triplesilk wrote: »

plus I had plenty of cash left over as I kept some back to renovate the house,

You were going to use this to renovate the house so it wouldn't have been available.

triplesilk wrote: »

plus my parents would have lent me £50k at the drop of a hat if I needed it,

Not guaranteed, they could have argued with you, and decided not to give you anything.

triplesilk wrote: »

plus I was highly employable at that time so would in all likelihood have quickly found a job if I needed to.

Not guaranteed, your area of expertise could have been flooded with people working for less.

triplesilk wrote: »

These are all things that I would have explained to the broker had they not said that I had no option but to take the insurance.

You always had the chance to explain all this, You were not a child when you took out a mortgage, but you didn't do any research and you believed what someone else what telling you.The internet was available in 2004, for most people, you could have researched your position there.
In your case, it might well have been compulsory as the broker would have provided advice in exchange for you buying insurance through him.


In any case, you are out of luck, your complaint is dead in the water, so wondering over what mighthave beens is doing you no good. Forget it.

triplesilk

I don't get the first point at all, im sayjng that i could have turned capital into income if I wanted in the event that my income stream ceased so could I could ensure playing the mortgage off if that was my goal. As for the series of unlikely events, the chances of all of these things happening was astronomically small and those odds are relvevant surely when it come to assessing the value of insurance.

The first I heard about this insurance when when queried it on the form as I was about to sign. Yes I could have stopped, said hołd on for 30 mins whilst I check this out, and hoped that he could hang around way past the alloted time but really, when you use a speciialist professional you don't expect to have to research every little thing at the last hour. I feel like most people would agree it was bad advice, but I accept that there is nothing I can do about it.

[Deleted User]

Could have. Would have. Should have.

None of these will get you a PPI refund, I'm afraid.