Financial Ombudsman latest - to be wary of.

N_Reyns

Hi All
I was wondering if anyone else has received a letter recently from the FOS regarding the new Plevin rule ? My case with Lloyds has been with the FOS for 8 years but it still hasn't gone to an ombudsman , only an adjudicator has responded & always negatively despite the fact that Lloyds have lied more than once on how I signed up for it ( which I never did).I received a letter on the 12/01/18 , in this letter it states that due to the new ruling Lloyds want make me an offer ! Good I thought but it was only for the amount of commission over 50% of the total cover , nothing to do with my original ppi claim. Here's the catch - in order to hear what the offer is I 1st have to agree to close my claim with them ! So they expect me to close a claim for approx 20k for an offer which could be anything and most probably derisory.I phoned Lloyds but they would not tell me the offer until they had heard off the FOS that I had closed my case against them.I believe this is a back handed way for the FOS to close a substantial amount of claims , so the reason I have posted this is for people to be aware , when I believe this new ruling should be in addition to a claim not instead of it.

dunstonh

My case with Lloyds has been with the FOS for 8 years but it still hasn't gone to an ombudsman , only an adjudicator has responded & always negatively

Once you were rejected, did you request for it to be referred to an ombudsman?

Nowadays, it doesnt take that long for the ombudsman referrals. 8 years does not sound at all right.

despite the fact that Lloyds have lied more than once on how I signed up for it ( which I never did).

The FOS are very liberal. Even when consumers are blatantly caught telling lies, the FOS will never assume it was on purpose and will treat it as an error. I guess it works both ways.

Here's the catch - in order to hear what the offer is I 1st have to agree to close my claim with them !

Which is logical as Plevin only applies to rejected complaints.

I phoned Lloyds but they would not tell me the offer until they had heard off the FOS that I had closed my case against them.I believe this is a back handed way for the FOS to close a substantial amount of claims , so the reason I have posted this is for people to be aware , when I believe this new ruling should be in addition to a claim not instead of it.

I disagree with your position. It is not backhanded. It is a logical outcome. As said, plevin only applies to rejected complaints. You have not accepted the rejection. So, moving it to a Plevin review wont happen until you do accept the rejection. Either by the ombudsman refusing your complaint or you accepting your complaint is over.

N_Reyns

Hi
when an adjudicator 1st rejected it , I replied to them to request an ombudsman look at it as the reasons they gave for rejecting it did not have any relevance to my claim.I believe I said to them that I thought she had mixed my case up with someone else as I did not recognize it as being mine.
To be honest I'm new to the Plevin rule , I hadn't heard from the Ombudsman in over a year and due to going through a divorce I forgot about it until received this recent letter.I spoke to the adjudicator on my case this morning and explained that I would like to continue with my claim.
It was Lloyds in the 1st instance that told me 8 years ago that they had added ppi to my card automatically due to an upgraded card back in March 2000 , they advised me to put a claim into them not a ppi claims company.I did this but they turned my claim down , which left me with the only alternative to go to the FOS.
Lloyds then told the FOS that I had gone into the branch on the 10th March 2000 to apply for PPI , I know this to be untrue as it was my 1st born due date & my wife was in the early stages of labour. Once I explained this , Lloyds then said that I signed up for PPI through the post.
Although I paid them I have never been told how much PPI I paid in by Lloyds, I phoned them this Tuesday and asked if they could let me know the amount of PPI I had paid in and they said no.I'll just wait & see now for a decision from the ombudsman,not sure of my options ( if any ) if it gets declined.

Kind regards.

dunstonh

To be honest I'm new to the Plevin rule , I hadn't heard from the Ombudsman in over a year

i would chase again. Most PPI decisions are not overturned by an ombudsman (and overall they only overturn around 1 in 10). PPI cases are easy for them to look at compared to most other things they review. You wouldnt expect it to take any more than 6-18 months. 8 years suggests an issue.

Even the complex referrals to the ombudsman typically take less than 2-3 years.

Lloyds then told the FOS that I had gone into the branch on the 10th March 2000 to apply for PPI , I know this to be untrue as it was my 1st born due date & my wife was in the early stages of labour. Once I explained this , Lloyds then said that I signed up for PPI through the post.

it is worth noting that an application in 2000 predates regulation of insurance and the documentation level for sales made 18 years ago is going to be light to non existent. It is still a period that was reliant on paper forms and these are likely to be destroyed. So, they are likely having to interpret data they have to try and rebuild the scenario.

You see lots of decisions published where there are interpretations are made based on what is available and different views on those interpretations. In most cases where that is the case, they really cant make a judgement on the sale but have to revert to whether it was suitable for you or not.

I would still chase the FOS as 8 years must make you the longest person to have a complaint outstanding at the FOS.

N_Reyns

Hi
This weekend I received a final decision on my claim after 8 years of waiting and it was a no, for the reasons quoted below;
"Lloyds says the card was sold during a meeting in branch on the 10/03/2000 .Mr R says it was sold via a postal application. As it's not clear how the policy was sold ,I've considered both types of sales channel when reaching my decision".
The above statement is untrue , as Lloyds originally told me that the ppi was added automatically when my gold card was upgraded to a platinum card.The FOS have the details of the phone call I had with Lloyds such as the name of the Lloyds member of staff, the date and time of the call.Loyds then came back and said that I had gone into branch to apply for ppi.I knew straight away this was untrue as it was on the date that my wife went into labour for our 1st child. Lloyds than came back saying that I had applied via the post , I'd never heard of ppi back in 2000.

The next reason given and I quote " Ive noted Mr R's comments about about the fact he had good sick pay benefits from his employer.So he seems to have had a need for the cover"

I find the above very confusing and contradictory , considering I've been waiting for 8 years I'm very dissapointed.I will be putting acomplaint in against the FOS but feel this is pretty much pointless as there is no right to appeal this decision.

Kindest regards

dunstonh

The next reason given and I quote " Ive noted Mr R's comments about about the fact he had good sick pay benefits from his employer.So he seems to have had a need for the cover"

Employer benefits, even good ones, are time limited. So, you do still have a financial need beyond that.

Its a myth that if you have employer benefits that you were missold. If the policy would not pay out if you had employer benefits can make it missold. If it pays out in addition to employer benefits then it is usually fine.

Non-advised cases are not required to check suitability. Advised cases are. Yours was almost certainly classed as non-advised based on your wording. Both methods considered by the FOS were non-advised. So, they dont have to meet the advice standard. So, method of distribution didnt really matter that much.

[Deleted User]

N_Reyns wrote: »

I will be putting acomplaint in against the FOS but feel this is pretty much pointless as there is no right to appeal this decision.

I'm afraid you've utterly exhausted the complaint process and, other than the excessive delay, you can't complain about the Ombudsman's decision any more than you can complain about the Bank's original rejection of your complaint eight years ago.

You might consider legal action, but I caution that you'd very likely be just as disappointed by the decision of a court.

Sorry.

societys_child

On the bright side, you can now move on to your Plevin complaint.