Lloyds PBA Claim - Strange Questions From Them

KevJ

Hello,

Firstly, apologies if this is in the wrong forum, etc. I searched the first 10 pages and couldn't see anything so I've started a new thread...

I've put in a claim through Resolver to claim back PBA charges, they've called and gone through their question set, fair enough but I couldn't help feeling the questions are not exactly unbiased, they included:

- When did you first pass your driving test?
- How often do you travel in a car (as driver or passenger) more than 1/4 mile away from your house?
- When did you first have a mobile phone?

Now I get that the vague relevance that the account came with breakdown and mobile phone insurance but really? The questions just seemed intrusive at best and entrapment at worst.

Has anyone else had to answer similar questions?

Many thanks in advance,
Kevin

jonesMUFCforever

How is it entrapment if you tell the truth (unless of course the lure of £££ is the overriding reason for the account being ''missold'' to you)?

TheBanker

Unfortunately, while you may be honest a lot of people are not.

What were your grounds for complaint? For example if you claimed the account offered no benefit to you, it's reasonable for them to ask these questions.

If you were "sold" the account on the basis of breakdown cover and mobile phone insurance, at a time when you did not drive or travel by car, or own a phone, then I would suggest they are quite likely to uphold your complaint.

KevJ

Careful JonesMUFC.

I'm comfortable and confident that the reason for my claim is that I was told I had to have the paid for account to qualify and keep an overdraft and loan.

What I'm uncomfortable and now concerned about is whether there is some points scoring decision system where they can protect themselves against a mis-sale by leaning on the other products that were provided.

My complaint is and is limited to the overdraft and loan account. The ancillary products were of limited interest / use to me but having a mobile phone and a car it's impossible to say that breakdown and mobile phone insurance were of zero benefit. I just didn't want to give them a defence (and then have to fight against said defence)...

...and that's why I thought the questions were unreasonable.

PeacefulWaters

The questions seem perfectly reasonable to me.

What should they ask instead?

eskbanker

KevJ wrote: »

the reason for my claim is that I was told I had to have the paid for account to qualify and keep an overdraft and loan.

As you say, questions about use of package features aren't directly relevant to this - all you need to do is to provide them with the evidence that you could have secured the same overdraft and loan on the same terms while holding one of their free accounts, as this is the only basis on which you'd be able to demonstrate misselling on those grounds.

KevJ

eskbanker wrote: »

As you say, questions about use of package features aren't directly relevant to this - all you need to do is to provide them with the evidence that you could have secured the same overdraft and loan on the same terms while holding one of their free accounts, as this is the only basis on which you'd be able to demonstrate misselling on those grounds.

That's exactly what I want to do! :beer: Do you know of any site that historically shows what accounts were available and when they were available?

KevJ

PeacefulWaters wrote: »

The questions seem perfectly reasonable to me.

What should they ask instead?

My complaint is that I've been paying for an account for 20 years for the benefit of having an overdraft facility which I now know I could have had for free... I'm not arguing the benefits of having breakdown or mobile phone insurance, both which I could have funded from the monies being spent on the account - and still saved money...

They weren't asking if I liked the ancillary products - or whether I'd still have bought them if they weren't bundled in the package- they were asking pre-determined questions to score points to reject my claim which I don't see as defensible.

eskbanker

KevJ wrote: »

Do you know of any site that historically shows what accounts were available and when they were available?

KevJ wrote: »

My complaint is that I've been paying for an account for 20 years for the benefit of having an overdraft facility which I now know I could have had for free...

But the question isn't whether there were free accounts with overdraft facilities (there undoubtedly would have been), the challenge (as per my earlier post with emphasis added) is to demonstrate that "you could have secured the same overdraft and loan on the same terms while holding one of their free accounts".

Some packaged accounts offer higher overdraft limits or better terms (and perhaps the same for loans too) so in some cases you might have been better off paying for the packaged account if, say, it offered a significantly lower interest rate (or higher value) on the overdraft or loan, or both.

However, the issue here is that you'll typically only find out about what they're prepared to offer to you personally ("subject to status", etc) when you actually apply, i.e. even if you were able to ascertain what their published product offering was 20 years ago that doesn't necessarily satisfy the requirement to demonstrate exactly what they'd have offered you if you'd only had a free account at the time.

colsten

KevJ wrote: »

My complaint is and is limited to the overdraft and loan account. The ancillary products were of limited interest / use to me but having a mobile phone and a car it's impossible to say that breakdown and mobile phone insurance were of zero benefit. I just didn't want to give them a defence (and then have to fight against said defence)...

was there an option for an account without the ancillary products? If no, why did you choose this account?