NOW OPEN: the MSE Forum 'Ask An Expert' event. This time we'd like your questions on TRAVEL & HOLIDAY DEALS. Post by Wed and deals expert MSE Oli will answer as many as he can.
MSE News: Arnold Schwarzenegger returns in new PPI reclaim ad

696 Posts



Arnold Schwarzenegger's animatronic head is hitting TV screens again today - in a new advert urging people to check whether they had PPI...
Read the full story:
'Arnold Schwarzenegger returns in new PPI reclaim ad'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
'Arnold Schwarzenegger returns in new PPI reclaim ad'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
Read the latest MSE News
Flag up a news story: [email protected]
Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
Flag up a news story: [email protected]
Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
0
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
Certainly a very large proportion was, but not enough to justify automatic refunds for everyone who was sold the insurance.
No one making a complaint has to "doff his cap", in fact many complaints are pretty blunt. I know mine was.:)
There should be a lot more automatic upholds but the trouble is the banks are inherently dishonest.
1 - Not all PPI was missold.
2 - Not all PPI was put in place by banks.
3 - There is nothing wrong with having PPI.
Your approach would be to punish the innocent firms/sellers.
Over half of PPI complaints are from people that dont have PPI. Yet they make all sorts of allegations. Consumers are equally dishonest. And banks have been paying out automatically on many cases for years.
Obviously, this would be difficult to do for data protection reasons and also if the customer is no longer at the address they have on file for older products, but unless the customer has completely evaporated then tracing them should be possible with a bit of effort.
Alas, your hopes are not met. The new ones are worse, and look like the cheapest advert from the tackiest ambulance chasers out there, and don't come across as being something serious form the government. I would trust the Gladstone-brooks guy more, which is none at all.
Just to reiterate, not every PPI policy was mis-sold.
It's not even a majority of PPI that was mis-sold.
The regulator decided that the fairest way to deal with the significant minority which were mis-sold was to streamline the complaint process and publicise the fact that a refund plus interest was available to those mis-sold.
The only truly unfortunate thing was that this method allowed Claims Management Companies to spring up and take huge swathes of customer redress by doing virtually nothing that could not be done alone and for free.
The last "forced" review, where the firms had to be proactive across the board was the pension review covering all pensions sold between 1988 and 1994. The person that set up that review later said that it resulted in too many people getting paid redress who did not deserve it. it created significant costs to firms that did no wrong and caused some to close down despite doing no wrong. And that was before todays compensation culture.
I haven't suffered any PPI complaints but that is largely down to me being mostly investments. I did have someone enquire if I had sold PPI to them. I hadn't. However, had I done so, it would have been a genuine sale (I am personally liable for the advice I give. So, its my pocket that it hits if I do wrong). Despite that, I know that person with their tone would have put in a complaint regardless.
I had a mortgage broker visit me one morning. A young guy not long started out. He was in tears because someone put a complaint in about missold PPI. He hadnt sold any and the complaint was rejected with no PPI sold but they still took it to the FOS and he suffered a £500 fee because of that. He was on a low income being new and that really hit him hard in the pocket and it completely changed his whole outlook. He couldnt do any business for weeks because his confidence had been shattered. The banks may be faceless but small firms are not.
No solution is going to be perfect and there are those that try it on on both sides. The whole PPI affair is messy with neither consumers, banks or the regulator coming out of it smelling of roses. (include the regulator as they knew, as did everyone, that the banks had been selling it that way for over 20 years and did nothing).