Pick up old claim or start again?

seasonalbiz

When the whole PPI thing came about I contacted Barclaycard about a card I'd had since 1995, they ignored my letter.

Then around 2011/2012 I tried again and they responded but basically told me they hadn't mislead me so no payout... contact the ombudsman, or jog-on. I was pretty annoyed about that as I had tried twice to have the PPI removed 15yrs ago (way before the scandal surfaced) but both times I was passed from dept to dept, on hold for 30mins - my phone credit ran out... which I'm pretty sure was tactical

Several house moves later, and at the end of 2015 I was forwarded a letter from a landlord of an address I had left, it was from BC trying to locate me saying "It is important that we contact you so that your claim is resolved... etc etc. You need to contact us to progress your PPI claim, please contact us".

I hadn't made contact with them since they told me to go away! So I was a little surprised, however by this time I was half way through a divorce, and as it wasn't a joint credit card... I thought I may as well leave it alone as any refund I received, I may well loose 50% to my ex. So I put the letter in a safe place, so safe I couldn't remember.

I've just found it. I was wondering if anyone had experienced the same thing and what the outcome was. I had intended to restart the claim from scratch once the divorce was over. But I am a little bewildered why they told me to go away, then tried to find me 3-4yrs later asking me to contact them.

I don't trust them one bit... I don't know whether I should respond to this letter (now over a year old) or start from scratch... because as it stands at the moment they have no confirmation I've received any correspondence from them. I'm a little worried by acknowledging receipt of either of these might give them an opportunity to wriggle out of paying me my money back.

Thanks.

Nasqueron

You can't start from scratch, you complained, they rejected you, you had 6 months to go to the FOS or the complaint is time barred. You might get lucky if they choose to look at your complaint again but you should expect rejection and you might get lucky

dunstonh

Then around 2011/2012 I tried again and they responded but basically told me they hadn't mislead me so no payout... contact the ombudsman, or jog-on. I was pretty annoyed about that as I had tried twice to have the PPI removed 15yrs ago (way before the scandal surfaced) but both times I was passed from dept to dept, on hold for 30mins - my phone credit ran out... which I'm pretty sure was tactical

Yet not annoyed enough to go to the FOS.

I hadn't made contact with them since they told me to go away! So I was a little surprised, however by this time I was half way through a divorce, and as it wasn't a joint credit card... I thought I may as well leave it alone as any refund I received, I may well loose 50% to my ex. So I put the letter in a safe place, so safe I couldn't remember.

No credit cards are joint. The account holder has additional cards issued on their account.

I had intended to restart the claim from scratch once the divorce was over.

Which you cant do.

But I am a little bewildered why they told me to go away, then tried to find me 3-4yrs later asking me to contact them.

A number of banks were told to revisit old complaints which may have been given a wrong rejection.

I don't trust them one bit..

yet they are trying to contact you.

I'm a little worried by acknowledging receipt of either of these might give them an opportunity to wriggle out of paying me my money back.

A rather strange position to take as your "intention" was to try and complain again to the same people that are trying to contact you.

seasonalbiz

Nasqueron wrote: »

You can't start from scratch, you complained, they rejected you, you had 6 months to go to the FOS or the complaint is time barred. You might get lucky if they choose to look at your complaint again but you should expect rejection and you might get lucky

Thanks for the info.

Many thanks also to dunstonh for the deconstruction of my post.

-taff

They sent you a letter, they invited you to complain again. So complain again and stop overthinking it. They are a finance company, not a machiavellian conspiracy outfit.

Nasqueron

-taff wrote: »

They sent you a letter, they invited you to complain again. So complain again and stop overthinking it. They are a finance company, not a machiavellian conspiracy outfit.

It's more likely they are sending out the CCL to everyone they have account details for without checking if they had complained. OP might get lucky if their records don't show they already complained and were rejected but equally they might realise after and reject it. Lot will depend when the CCL was sent - OP got it in 2015 after moving but if it was sent earlier they may be able to use the 3 year time bar also.

seasonalbiz

Nasqueron wrote: »

It's more likely they are sending out the CCL to everyone they have account details for without checking if they had complained. OP might get lucky if their records don't show they already complained and were rejected but equally they might realise after and reject it. Lot will depend when the CCL was sent - OP got it in 2015 after moving but if it was sent earlier they may be able to use the 3 year time bar also.

Thank you for you input.

Frankly, I'm not sure what timing has to do with anything - other than enforced restriction (which is factually prevalent here, but not worthy of some replies)... in which case a bit of morality can prevail.

If someone defrauded you, then the time it takes you to respond to that (morally) cannot be fundamentally time constraint, you might not be in a position to respond within a certain time, but fraud is fraud; and failing to respond within a time period does not exonorate the perpetrators .

Fraud is obtaining reward via deception... mis-sold PPI was exactly that.

The only PPI I have ever been involved in is with my first credit card, Barclaycard, which I took out when I was around 18... I've had a myriad of cards and loans since, never took it out again - still unsure as to whether I agreed to BC's PPI.

I believe I was signed up to a payment protection plan which would not of assisted me in the slightest should I of become unemployed, because I've been mostly self employed.

Taff... you're suggestion banks aren't Machiavellian... i.e. cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous. I beg to differ, as if there weren't all of these - there would be no PPI scandal... but I accept your opinion in discussion.

So lets be frank, all I am trying to do here is reclaim money for a repayment protection scheme, which most likely would of not of protected me at all.

So lets make it simple. Don't reply unless you have something constructive to say, if you want to insult my inteligence - just call me a mug.

I'll be perfectly ok with that, because if you think the world of banking isn't unscrupulous, then your a mug and I wish you well in your life of passive stupidity.

[Deleted User]

seasonalbiz wrote: »

Fraud is obtaining reward via deception... mis-sold PPI was exactly that.

If you truly believe mis-selling is fraud then I invite you to call the police as that is a crime.

seasonalbiz wrote: »

Don't reply

That's not something you can demand or request on an open forum I'm afraid. What you really mean is don't reply unless in agreement with your point of view...

I think your query has already been fully answered anyhow.

seasonalbiz

No, I said if you haven't got anything constructive to say, then call me a mug. I thought this was a site which is supposed to help David with Goliath.

I have plenty of friends whom have reclaimed PPI, in PAYE employment of whom PPI would of assisted, but they just never needed it. IMHO they are those whom are exploiting the situation.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

I think your query has already been fully answered anyhow.

I agree.

Nasqueron

seasonalbiz wrote: »

Thank you for you input.

Frankly, I'm not sure what timing has to do with anything - other than enforced restriction (which is factually prevalent here, but not worthy of some replies)... in which case a bit of morality can prevail.

If you are aware of the DISP rules on finance then I won't quote them in detail, but basically you have 6 years from taking out a product or 3 years from being made aware of a reason to complain about a product (whichever is longer) before a complaint can be time barred. If you complained in 2012 and were rejected then the 3 year time bar is in force (if they wish to invoke it).

The FOS allow 6 months to refer a rejection to them for consideration. Anything outside of this is also time barred (they will consider some outside this if there is a serious reason such as a cancer diagnosis).

A bank sending out a CCL (customer contact letter) is deemed by the FOS as sufficient to trigger the 3 year clock so if the letter was sent January 2014 (it is deemed as delivered 2 days after it was sent first class) then you not getting it until 2015 would mean this was also a 3 year rule being met. If the letter was sent inside 3 years (as of today) then you may get lucky as it would appear the bank either didn't notice you complained already; decided they might have made a mistake and asked you to contact them again; just sent it to everyone to cover their backs - you won't know unless you try and complain again. Obviously mentioning you already complained will probably cause them to reject it.

seasonalbiz wrote: »

If someone defrauded you, then the time it takes you to respond to that (morally) cannot be fundamentally time constraint, you might not be in a position to respond within a certain time, but fraud is fraud; and failing to respond within a time period does not exonorate the perpetrators .

Sadly not true, there is a legal time bar in place to stop complaints dragging on forever. A criminal issue is different but then you would be pushing the police to convict the bank staff of a crime, not the civil issue of demanding money back. Don't forget that people who borrow money then skip their debts get their slate wiped clean after 6 years even if they deliberately didn't pay back their debts.

seasonalbiz wrote: »

Fraud is obtaining reward via deception... mis-sold PPI was exactly that.

I am not aware of any court case where PPI miss-selling was proven to be a criminal issue so I can't comment on that

seasonalbiz wrote: »

The only PPI I have ever been involved in is with my first credit card, Barclaycard, which I took out when I was around 18... I've had a myriad of cards and loans since, never took it out again - still unsure as to whether I agreed to BC's PPI.

I believe I was signed up to a payment protection plan which would not of assisted me in the slightest should I of become unemployed, because I've been mostly self employed.

This is actually a claims company myth, most PPI covered the self employed, the only issue is where the policy would only pay out under particularly onerous conditions such as requiring the firm to be dissolved which the FOS have ruled on previously so will know which PPI products come under that

[Deleted User]

seasonalbiz wrote: »

Don't reply unless you have something constructive to say

It's 'would have' and 'I have', not 'would of' and 'I of'.