Ppi storecard claims

williambillsmith

I have made two PPI claims on the 'Resolver' format;

Both were for PPI added to monthly statements for various storecards;

The first claim was against G E Capital Bank consists of 9 (nine) different storecards (Dorothy Perkins, Debenhams, Bentalls etc etc) all of which operated with / by / under / in association with or whatever with G E Capital Bank;

Similarly, claim 2 was lodged against Lloyds Bank which operated with / by / under / in association with or whatever storecards from Messrs Fenwicks, Selfridges, Wallis;

All payments made for purchases on these storecards were made to one of the two banks as referred to.

QUESTION:

Am I correct to group these two lots of storecard claims against the bank they used or operated through,

OR

should a separate claim be made against the actual individual storecard? So, instead of grouping them in two claims against the bank they used, should I be claiming against each provider, ie against Fenwicks / Selfridges / Debenhams / Bentalls etc etc individually??

Comments & advice if I have done the right thing, please.

[Deleted User]

How can all these cards have been COLLECTIVELY mis-sold to you, when they were sold individually? What generic reason did you give?

You needed to complain to individual sellers.

Each card should be complained about individually.

Remember it is not wrong somehow to simply have insurance.


It's also important to realise that prior to 2005 the sale of these cards was not regulated.


What is the status of your two "claims", so far?
I would expect both Lloyds and GE to respond that your complaint is not valid.

williambillsmith

Dear Monetineptitude;

Thank you for your comments;

Not sure what you mean by 'how could they have been sold collectively';

To explain further; All the various storecards referred to were taken out individually at various times by my wife. [WITHOUT MY DIRECT KNOWLEGE OR CONTROL, so don't associate ME with any of her 'Moneyineptitude' !!!! ]

They have long since been paid off [by guess who] and date back to the late 1990s to early 2000s. Each storecard, without reference to my wife added "PPI" to each monthly statement, - on which she paid the minimum balance due..............
Some of the payments were to be made to GE Capital Bank, some to Lloyds etc etc., hence the question of whether to claim against the BANK(s) - OR - the individual storecards.
As I said, I have made the two claims on my wife's behalf, - rightly or wrongly, - against the banks named as being to whom payments were to be made. Hence several storecards were lumped together in these against these two banks.

Reason its happening now, is recently having a clear-out, - found a file with lots of these old statements.

Oh! What happy memories................................. I don't think...........!!

Saw all the entries of "PPI" added so, - on went the lightbulb;

I hope that explains it more clearly, so, if you know about how these claims should be made, and bearing in mind that the notes on Moneysavingexpert say that there is no time limit on how far you can go back, further advice would be welcome.

societys_child

To explain further; All the various storecards referred to were taken out individually at various times by my wife. [WITHOUT MY DIRECT KNOWLEGE OR CONTROL, so don't associate ME with any of her 'Moneyineptitude' !!!! ]

Exactly, they are individual and not associated with each there.
Your wife took them out without your control? Whoa.

The fact you paid them is irrelevant.

Saw all the entries of "PPI" added so, - on went the lightbulb

There's nothing wrong with ppi, the issue is about mis-selling. Your liightbulb groweth dim. What are your complaint reasons?

[Deleted User]

williambillsmith wrote: »

Each storecard, without reference to my wife added "PPI" to each monthly statement,

So you are alleging that the PPI was added without her knowledge and permission?

While this is certainly possible, why have you then waited over twenty years to complain about it? Why did she (you) continue to pay it despite it being on every statement?

It's a myth sponsored by Claim Companies that PPI was routinely added in this manner. Without any evidence, your complaint is very weak.

As already pointed out, each card account will need a separate complaint.

Lastly, you do realise that you can't complain on behalf of your wife?

williambillsmith

Yes, PPI was added without her prior agreement. She just paid, assuming (as you might) that she was obliged to pay.
As stated, - we have copy statements showing the PPI entry, so we do have "Evidence"; Contrary to your comment, it seems that Storecard companies routinely DID add PPI to their statements, and, as already said, we have the evidence in the form of wads of old storecard statements from these various providers

I accept that I cannot claim on someone else's behalf.

We are routinely assailed from every quarter and TV advert break that we should be claiming back PPI and banks have reserved billions for compensation, no claim is time-barred, and we have black & white written evidence of having been charged for it............... hard to believe we don't have some sort of a claim ......... ??

Presumably adding PPI to all these storecards was clearly a common practice, so other people must have had a similar issue? How have others dealt with this matter?

Nasqueron

williambillsmith wrote: »

Yes, PPI was added without her prior agreement. She just paid, assuming (as you might) that she was obliged to pay.
As stated, - we have copy statements showing the PPI entry, so we do have "Evidence"; Contrary to your comment, it seems that Storecard companies routinely DID add PPI to their statements, and, as already said, we have the evidence in the form of wads of old storecard statements from these various providers

I accept that I cannot claim on someone else's behalf.

We are routinely assailed from every quarter and TV advert break that we should be claiming back PPI and banks have reserved billions for compensation, no claim is time-barred, and we have black & white written evidence of having been charged for it............... hard to believe we don't have some sort of a claim ......... ??

Presumably adding PPI to all these storecards was clearly a common practice, so other people must have had a similar issue? How have others dealt with this matter?

Sorry William but PPI was almost never added without the knowledge and permission of the person - there are the odd isolated case of rogue staff members ticking the box after the person leaves but these are easily disputed as the customer copy won't have a tick but the carbon copy does so easy proof of fraud. What actually happens is the person goes to the store, applies for a card, the salesperson does a quick run through of it, then the person ticks the box and signs. You CANNOT have PPI added without your knowledge (except in cases of fraud, which are very rare) because you have to sign the form with the "I want PPI" box ticked.

Logically in cases of fraud, if you did not want PPI / it was added fraudulently you would complain immediately about this unwanted charge appears on the very first statement making it clear what has happened. It was 20 years ago it's likely she has simply forgotten what happened, certainly it does not give any weight to your argument that you complained so much later.

Contrary to your statement, PPI was NOT routinely added without consent, PPI certainly has been miss-sold (e.g. store staff not checking if the person was eligible; skipping over what it was/not explaining properly etc).

PPI was not "added to statements" however, you are misunderstanding how it works - it's an insurance charged based on how much you had on your card balance (if paid off in full, you paid nothing) - typically charged around 70p per £100 of debt.

What Money is pointing out is that evidence you had/paid PPI is not evidence you were miss-sold. Yes banks have allocated money for PPI complaints but that doesn't mean they were miss-sold. Many claims ARE time-barred - there are financial rules in place that allow that (the 6 / 3 year rule). Nobody has a "claim", you put in a complaint and see what happens.

As it is, complaints about certain store cards (those now handled by Santander) tend to auto-pay regardless of whether they were miss-sold or not so you may well get lucky

williambillsmith

OK;

Thanks.


.............Ho Hum..................

[Deleted User]

Nasqueron wrote: »

so you may well get lucky

Only if the complaints are made individually, of course, as already pointed out to the OP.