FOS - Complaint not upheld

Adam1V

I was wondering if I could get some advice from anyone on here, whether they've experienced anything similar.

Essentially I was recently contacted directly by my credit card company who suggest they believed they may have mis-sold me PPI.
I was in agreement as I wasn't aware I was paying PPI and with such a low credit limit (£500), the cost of PPI almost outweighed the cost of the minimum payment (PPI cover then was 80p per £100).

The credit card was taken out a long time back and hasnt been used for a long time either.

Speaking with the FOS and Barclays, as there is no evidence provided by either party, the FOS has chosen to take an approach of "we believe you were advised of PPI" because this was Barclays practise at the time. This is despite the fact the credit agreement wasnt completed by myself and the sale advisor at the time had opted for the PPI cover.

I'm genuinely certain I wasn't made aware of the PPI cover at the time and this wasnt explained during the sale.

Does anyone have any suggestions or comments that might apply? It must be a common scenario where evidence is lacking due to the lapsed time?

[Deleted User]

The onus is on you as the complainant to provide the evidence. Otherwise the decision will be made on the balance of probabilities.

glentoran99

Adam1V wrote: »

I was wondering if I could get some advice from anyone on here, whether they've experienced anything similar.

Essentially I was recently contacted directly by my credit card company who suggest they believed they may have mis-sold me PPI.
I was in agreement as I wasn't aware I was paying PPI and with such a low credit limit (£500), the cost of PPI almost outweighed the cost of the minimum payment (PPI cover then was 80p per £100).

The credit card was taken out a long time back and hasnt been used for a long time either.

Speaking with the FOS and Barclays, as there is no evidence provided by either party, the FOS has chosen to take an approach of "we believe you were advised of PPI" because this was Barclays practise at the time. This is despite the fact the credit agreement wasnt completed by myself and the sale advisor at the time had opted for the PPI cover.

I'm genuinely certain I wasn't made aware of the PPI cover at the time and this wasnt explained during the sale.

Does anyone have any suggestions or comments that might apply? It must be a common scenario where evidence is lacking due to the lapsed time?

did you sign it?

dunstonh

Essentially I was recently contacted directly by my credit card company who suggest they believed they may have mis-sold me PPI.

CCLs are not saying you have been missold. They are inviting you to complain if you feel you have been missold and they give various reasons why you may have.

It sounds like you raised a complaint and they looked at it and rejected your complaint. The FOS have rejected it too.

This is despite the fact the credit agreement wasnt completed by myself and the sale advisor at the time had opted for the PPI cover.

Which would be the case in non-advised and advised sales. It doesnt mean anything.

I'm genuinely certain I wasn't made aware of the PPI cover at the time and this wasnt explained during the sale.

That is a very weak complaint reason. it is an unprovable allegation. What evidence do you have to support that allegation?

When you first started seeing PPI premiums being deducted from your statements, what did you do about it? After all, someone paying for something they didnt agree to tends to complain when it happens.

Adam1V

dunstonh wrote: »

That is a very weak complaint reason. it is an unprovable allegation. What evidence do you have to support that allegation?

When you first started seeing PPI premiums being deducted from your statements, what did you do about it? After all, someone paying for something they didnt agree to tends to complain when it happens.

I have no evidence, nor does the company selling the product.
I wasn't aware the premiums were being deducted from my account until recently. That said I dont see the relevance of this question? If the product was mis-sold it was mis-sold, my poor money management or lack of checking my bills doesnt alter the above fact?

glentoran99 wrote: »

did you sign it?

Yes I have signed it but not selected it (myself). No-where on the sheet did it mention what PPI was and what charges would be added.

-taff

No one has any evidence. Nothing can prove or disprove your allegations, therefore there is no redress.

dunstonh

I have no evidence, nor does the company selling the product.

And UK law puts the onus on the accuser, you hit this brick wall.

I wasn't aware the premiums were being deducted from my account until recently. That said I dont see the relevance of this question?

It is relevant in terms of credibility. You get your statement each month. If you see a wrong transaction on it, you tend to raise that issue very quickly. Someone who raises it within days or months is very credible even where there is little or no evidence to support that allegation. You often see upheld complaints with no evidence succeed when it is shortly after the transaction. If you are looking years, or even decades after the event, then there is no credibility and you cannot expect success when none of the evidence available supports the allegation.

If the product was mis-sold it was mis-sold, my poor money management or lack of checking my bills doesnt alter the above fact?

And thre is no evidence to say it was mis-sold. hence, why your complaint was rejected.