Two upheld but one too late?

Aquarian72

Dear Members,

My dad is desperately ill and has been for the last 30 years or so, over which time he had a number of loans with Lloyds bank, who he's had a bank account with for even longer. Some of the PPI has been accepted, as they recognise he wasn't employed and didn't need the insurance, however one of the loans - which strangely enough would be the largest payout - they've replied saying that; "I'm unable to review your mis-selling complaint in relation to loan ending .... as we received it outside the time limit for the submission of a complaint. Time Limit: We wrote to you about your PPI on ... 2013, we explained that we had reviewed our PPI sales process and found that your PPI policy may have been mis-sold. We outlined common failings in PPI sales and invited you to respond to us promptly if any of these concerns applied to you. Where the PPI was sold more than six years ago the Financial Conduct Authority's complaint handling rules set a time limit of three years from the date that a consumer is aware that they have cause to complain".

Now what is a puzzle is that a) one of the loans they are repaying PPI on was taken out in 2009 my maths isn't good but I'm sure that's more than 3 years ago and b) my dad wasn't aware he was sold ANY PPI as no-one ever asked him! The only time he was asked was with his last loan, where he told the clerk he had no need as he has been disabled and unable to work for 30 years (he has emphysema and can't walk 3 feet without needing to rely on his oxygen tank to keep his heart beating!).

We only found out about the PPI as I stayed at his house to help him with his filing and noticed all the loans he had taken out. He has all original loan paperwork, which he photocopied and included with the claim forms btw.

I have never claimed PPI before so I don't want to suggest anything that loses my dad money, after failed marriages and being left with a load of debt it would be great for him to get some money in for a change!

Thanks for any advice (please be gentle )

dunstonh

We wrote to you about your PPI on ... 2013, we explained that we had reviewed our PPI sales process and found that your PPI policy may have been mis-sold. We outlined common failings in PPI sales and invited you to respond to us promptly if any of these concerns applied to you.

That letter is known as a CCL and is sufficient to start the trigger on the 3 year clock.

Now what is a puzzle is that a) one of the loans they are repaying PPI on was taken out in 2009 my maths isn't good but I'm sure that's more than 3 years ago

Maybe the CCL didnt cover that loan. Lloyds had distribution methods that varied from really bad to generally ok. The CCL's were typically sent out on the cases that were generally quite bad (statistically speaking).

Aquarian72

Thank you so much for your prompt reply.

So can Lloyds say this loan (conveniently the largest PPI paid by my dad) won't get repaid due to a time limit yet others are being honoured even though they also fall outside said time limit too?

Also, I found all my dad's loan paperwork when reorganising his filing cabinet and in doing so no letter from Lloyds dated 2013 cropped up and my dad didn't throw any letters away (trust me, I spent 5 days filing!), so what if they didn't send this letter out at all? I can send them any medical proof going back 30 years to show my dad wouldn't have agreed to buying any PPI as he wasn't working when he took the first loan out. Isn't it worth us fighting Lloyds on this one?

If it is can anyone point me to the right direction as to the next step please?

Thanks in advance

[Deleted User]

Aquarian72 wrote: »

can anyone point me to the right direction as to the next step please?

You give up. Even the Ombudsman cannot overturn a properly applied time-bar.

"Fighting"?

dunstonh

So can Lloyds say this loan (conveniently the largest PPI paid by my dad) won't get repaid due to a time limit yet others are being honoured even though they also fall outside said time limit too?

If they others were able to be timebarred, they would have.

To timebar a complaint, it needs to have had certain documentation issued. They cant just say they were before a certain date. The timebar letter would be for a certain loan/credit arrangement and not cover all loans.

so what if they didn't send this letter out at all?

It is assumed sent and received.

Isn't it worth us fighting Lloyds on this one?

Who are you going to fight it with? If Lloyds will not overrule the timebar then the FOS wont (as they cannot overrule valid timebars)