Ppi claim rejected Halifax 1995 now bank of scotland

Word24

Hi
I would just like to ask for some help and advice.

My husband took out a mortgage in 1995 with the Halifax. Both myself and my now husband were present at the meeting. We were told we had to take out their ppi in order to get the mortgage. We were not told it was optional. It was a 40,000 and we had a deposit and savings left of over 10,000 which would have covered us for a year.

The Bank of Scotland rejected our claim and the Ombudsman has too and wants to close the claim. In the explanation it says that the adjudicator can not safely conclude that we were not told it was optional given the length of time since the sale and lack of information.
I don't think that is far. Any comments please.

Another point was my husband back then had only been with his company for 10 months and the conditions said he should have been employed for 12 months. Surely the ppi was mis sold because of this?

My husband had over 10,000 savings but although this has been noted, the policy was still said to be suitable. Back in 1995 he was very employable.

Any help and comments would be appreciated.

[Deleted User]

I'm afraid you've exhausted the Complaint process if the Ombudsman has ruled in favour of the Bank, but just to address a few of your points;

The insurance was set up precisely so that you didn't need to be reliant upon savings in the event of unemployment. The amount you had saved is therefore irrelevant.

As long as your husband had worked for his company for twelve months or more at the time of any claim the insurance would still have paid out.

Basically you made an allegation that you were apparently told that the insurance was compulsory when it wasn't.
The Bank have refuted this and the Ombudsman can find no evidence to support your allegation of wrong doing.
Such "hearsay" type complaints are the weakest you can make because you can provide no proof or evidence of what may or may not have been said.

In the absence of other faults with the sale, your complaint has been rejected. You can appeal one final time so that an actual Ombudsman considers your complaint, but nothing you have said indicates that the adjudicator will be overruled.

Word24

Thank you for your reply. I am not sure how we could prove this as the the Bank of Scotland has no paperwork, but what could we have that would prove this? what evidence would there be. I have some paperwork in the loft, but what would prove this? We were told it was compulsory but have no evidence. Can you give us some examples?

[Deleted User]

Word24 wrote: »

what could we have that would prove this? what evidence would there be. We were told it was compulsory but have no evidence. Can you give us some examples?

There are no examples of proof of "hearsay" allegations, that's why I said your complaint was the weakest possible.

You need to realise that your complaint is now over I'm afraid. As I said, you can appeal the adjudicator's findings but the chances of them being overruled are very slim indeed.

-taff

If you have something in writing that says it was compulsory, then that'll do it. Otherwise.....