Payout dependant on the Way ppi was mis sold

Johague49

Hi guys,I've got a ppi complaint in process at the moment with lloyds for a mortgage taken out in 2001,I had a direct phone call from the bank yesterday asking for details, they told me the amount I received back would depend on how my ppi was mis sold in the first place..I'm not quite sure what they meant so thought I would try here for advice before giving them details,hope you can enlighten me...thank you

Nasqueron

Johague49 wrote: »

Hi guys,I've got a ppi complaint in process at the moment with lloyds for a mortgage taken out in 2001,I had a direct phone call from the bank yesterday asking for details, they told me the amount I received back would depend on how my ppi was mis sold in the first place..I'm not quite sure what they meant so thought I would try here for advice before giving them details,hope you can enlighten me...thank you

The first thing would be whether it was bought from Lloyds or via a third party like a broker - that would affect whether they are liable or not.

If it was done as a single premium (paid upfront, included in the loan) you'd expect either a refund of the lot or so called comparative redress where they compensate on the difference between SP and a monthly charge - however, I don't think banks often did that sort of thing, it was usually set up as a monthly direct debit.

Why do you feel it was miss-sold?

Vectis

Johague49 wrote: »

Hi guys,I've got a ppi complaint in process at the moment with lloyds for a mortgage taken out in 2001,I had a direct phone call from the bank yesterday asking for details, they told me the amount I received back would depend on how my ppi was mis sold in the first place..I'm not quite sure what they meant so thought I would try here for advice before giving them details,hope you can enlighten me...thank you

What an odd question! Surely you are the only one who knows how it was mis-sold?

Unless, of course, you want advice on what to claim for even if it's not what actually happened?

[Deleted User]

Vectis wrote: »

Unless, of course, you want advice on what to claim for even if it's not what actually happened?

As the OP has already started his complaint, and given extra details in the telephone call, it seems far more likely that the OP is wondering in what circumstances the Bank might deem the PPI mis-sold and not pay full redress.

Banks often uphold complaints for entirely different reasons than the complainant provides.

But it's difficult for anyone here to surmise what the Bank operator was alluding to without far more information being provided by the OP.

societys_child

Sounds like the op has complained about the ppi, and the bank have phoned him to ask what his actual complaint is?

Perhaps the title should be:
Payout dependant on IF the [STRIKE]Way[/STRIKE] ppi was mis sold?

[Deleted User]

societys_child wrote: »

Sounds like the op has complained about the ppi, and the bank have phoned him to ask what his actual complaint is?

Lloyds do routinely call complainants to obtain "further information" so it's perfectly possible, therefore, that the OP's complaint was thoroughly bonafide.

It's also possible that the OP just "applied" for a refund without giving a proper mis-selling reason.

Until the OP comes back to elaborate, though, it is futile to speculate.

societys_child

It's also possible that the OP just "applied" for a refund without giving a proper mis-selling reason.

Is what I was thinking.

McKneff

2001 preregulation. I'm surprised they haven't just rejected it out of habd

Nasqueron

McKneff wrote: »

2001 preregulation. I'm surprised they haven't just rejected it out of habd

If it was direct with Lloyds it's not pre-regulation

[Deleted User]

McKneff wrote: »

2001 preregulation.

Banks were already regulated prior to 2005; I think you may have forgotten this over your years here, McKneff.