Blaming another company?

chann856

I have an original contract where I was sold PPI that I never needed, given that I was in guaranteed full time employment. I thought at the time it was needed for the loan to progress, as it is on the contact agreement form for the loan.

Having used the resolver (thank you) The bank who the contract is with 'GE finance' has written back to me stating that it was a third party 'The Loan Company' that sold me the PPI, and that GE finance provided the money.

The Loan company are no more

What should be next move be, if any? All help welcome.

Of note the date of the Loan was 24 March 2005

dunstonh

I have an original contract where I was sold PPI that I never needed, given that I was in guaranteed full time employment.

Which makes you a judge or a police officer. If you are not one of those then you are not in guaranteed full time employment.

Of note the date of the Loan was 24 March 2005

What was the date of application?

The loan advance date is not key. The date you signed the application is. For most people they can give rough dates. However, insurance regulation started on 14th January 2005. That will be very close to your date of application (as secured loans often take a number of weeks/months to go through).

GE have no liability. So, they are correct to say it is not them. You complain to The Loan Company. However, The Loan Company were deauthorised in 2009. So instead, you refer your complaint to the FSCS as long as the application was after 14th Jan 05.

ardupp

I have ALL the paperwork from a loan via 1st National Bank brokered through Swift Finance in 1989. Started my PPI claim
to GE Money nearly 4 years ago . They took months to respond so contacted the F.O.soon after which I got letter from GE saying Swift Finance was responsible for demanding PPI on the loan (They told us at the time that 1st National insisted on the PPI) and we should deal with them as GE would have nothing more to do with it. I wrote to PPI Claims, Swift Finance in 2015 and sent it by recorded delivery but the following month ( Feb) it was returned to me as a refusal to accept. I complained to the FO immediately and got a reference no. From then on I had several health and IT problems and have only been able recently to resurrect the issue with the F.O. who now tell me as the issue preceded October 2004, there is no case to answer effectively.
Q1) Why didn't the F.O. tell me that when I first contacted them in 2014
Q2) I thought that the law of contract states that if an agent (Swift Finance) acts on behalf of an organisation (1st National bank/GE Money) then that organisation is responsible for the actions of that agent. Help

dunstonh

Q1) Why didn't the F.O. tell me that when I first contacted them in 2014

Technically, you were given the right info by the FOS. The broker has the liability. Not the lender. So, the complaint should have gone to the broker.

1989 is 16 years prior to the regulation of insurance. So, it would require the broker to volunteer to accept and review your complaint. So, technically, it was a possibility they would volunteer. However, would you expect them to volunteer? No. And that is the most common outcome. So, the FOS were correct in what they told you. They just didnt tell you would likely happen next as they dont want to put you off. You could be that 1 in 10,000 chance they volunteered to look at it.

Q2) I thought that the law of contract states that if an agent (Swift Finance) acts on behalf of an organisation (1st National bank/GE Money) then that organisation is responsible for the actions of that agent. Help

Too many incorrect assumptions. For example, I am an IFA. I can place business anyway and have agencies with most providers because of that. However, I am not an agent of any of them. It is the same with brokers. They can place loans with different places. They dont become agents because of it. An agent of the lender or insurer has to be employed or authorised under the lender/insurer.

Your complaint is over. Its 16 years prior to regulation and sold be an unregulated company. You neither have access to the FOS or the FSCS.