We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Santander SCULK Time-Barred??
Comments
-
-
Moneyineptitude wrote: »That was the Op of this thread. Your circumstance was different.
Well done on your success!
I did worry I'd fall foul of the same.
Thank you so much!0 -
What suggests this was an auto payment?Sounds like a low value auto-pay to be honest
Doesn’t Santander have to follow a regulated complaint procedure for investigating, assessing and resolving PPI complaints? As they must provide data on specific PPI management information to the FCA, where does the bank record such information as “bothered to investigate” when it sends this data to the FCA?given if they'd bothered to investigate
Which time bar are you referring to?they would easily have applied the timebar
Santander is assessing all aspects of mis- selling complaints relating to PPI taken out with GE money (Dorothy Perkins store card), up to and including 14th January 2005 on behalf of FICL. FICL, as the insurer, has taken responsibility for these complaints. Complaints from 1997-the date the OP took out the store card policy-and earlier have been upheld.So not an auto payment from the bank then?0 -
What suggests this was an auto payment?
A payment of refund after only 8 weeks without fussDoesn!!!8217;t Santander have to follow a regulated complaint procedure for investigating, assessing and resolving PPI complaints? As they must provide data on specific PPI management information to the FCA, where does the bank record such information as !!!8220;bothered to investigate!!!8221; when it sends this data to the FCA?
This is being facetious. I mean they looked the the complaint, decided not to fight it as payment was below whatever threshold they use and paid out, rather than deciding whether they were liableWhich time bar are you referring to?
Santander is assessing all aspects of mis- selling complaints relating to PPI taken out with GE money (Dorothy Perkins store card), up to and including 14th January 2005 on behalf of FICL. FICL, as the insurer, has taken responsibility for these complaints. Complaints from 1997-the date the OP took out the store card policy-and earlier have been upheld.So not an auto payment from the bank then?
You are probably as confused as everyone else, there are 2 different cases on here, one from Fancyette regarding his/her parents taking out a policy in 2003 and the case where emsjune78 hijacked this thread with a complaint about a card in 1997. 1997 would be subject to the 6 year time bar and also pre-regulation complaint (and quite probably 3 year). At least as recently as late 2016 Santander were rejecting these old GE cards and the route of FOS -> Genworth (underwriter) was required. Santander now seem to be accepting the Arcadia group (including DP) complaints.
Everything about this short time frame and decision not to time bar it smacks of auto-paymentSam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
Do you mean refer to the FOS?A payment of refund after only 8 weeks without fuss
Again, Santander aren’t liable for the mis selling of PPI policies up to and including 14th January 2005(that’s pre regulation) -the FICL (the insurer) has taken responsibility .This is being facetious. I mean they looked the the complaint, decided not to fight it as payment was below whatever threshold they use and paid out, rather than deciding whether they were liable
AXA Partners
“Making a Complaint About the Sale of Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) Taken Out with GE Money
Financial Insurance Company Limited and Financial Assurance Company Limited, the insurers of your PPI policy (each the Insurer) have reached agreement with Santander UK PLC (Santander) regarding an adjusted approach to our handling of mis-selling complaints that results in an enhanced customer journey.
All aspects of mis-selling complaints relating to Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) taken out with GE Money, up to and including 14 January 2005, will now be assessed by Santander on behalf of Financial Insurance Company Limited and Financial Assurance Company Limited. Santander should therefore be the first point of contact for all customer mis-selling complaints. Mis-selling complaints received by Santander or the Insurer since 28 July 2017 will also be assessed on this basis. You should contact Santander directly to register your complaint on the details below, or if you have any questions about existing complaints or the complaints handling process"You are probably as confused as everyone else, there are 2 different cases on here, one from Fancyette regarding his/her parents taking out a policy in 2003 and the case where emsjune78 hijacked this thread with a complaint about a card in 1997. 1997 would be subject to the 6 year time bar and also pre-regulation complaint (and quite probably 3 year).
FOS decisions published this year-re PPI polices sold with a Dorothy Perkins card in 1997
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=175270
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=175479
A very recent FOS decision April 2018At least as recently as late 2016 Santander were rejecting these old GE cards and the route of FOS -> Genworth (underwriter) was required. Santander now seem to be accepting the Arcadia group (including DP) complaints.
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=178216
It is not unusual to get a final response in 8 weeks. Latest data 2017 H2 shows Santander Insurance and Pure Protection: Percentage closed after 3 days but within 8 weeks 74% Percentage upheld 62% ..Everything about this short time frame and decision not to time bar it smacks of auto-payment0 -
Do you mean refer to the FOS?
No, again you are getting confused between the 2 posters on this thread, this is the problem with thread hijacking, 2 different cases, 2 different people, information getting mixed up. The person with the DP account (so Arcadia group, Santander taking liability) is emsjune78 who hijacked the thread halfway through. She complained to Santander who paid out after 8 weeks, the FOS were not involved. Fancyette has been time barred by Santander and has gone to the FOS, he/she was the first poster.Again, Santander aren!!!8217;t liable for the mis selling of PPI policies up to and including 14th January 2005(that!!!8217;s pre regulation) -the FICL (the insurer) has taken responsibility .
AXA Partners
!!!8220;Making a Complaint About the Sale of Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) Taken Out with GE Money
Financial Insurance Company Limited and Financial Assurance Company Limited, the insurers of your PPI policy (each the Insurer) have reached agreement with Santander UK PLC (Santander) regarding an adjusted approach to our handling of mis-selling complaints that results in an enhanced customer journey.
All aspects of mis-selling complaints relating to Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) taken out with GE Money, up to and including 14 January 2005, will now be assessed by Santander on behalf of Financial Insurance Company Limited and Financial Assurance Company Limited. Santander should therefore be the first point of contact for all customer mis-selling complaints. Mis-selling complaints received by Santander or the Insurer since 28 July 2017 will also be assessed on this basis. You should contact Santander directly to register your complaint on the details below, or if you have any questions about existing complaints or the complaints handling process"
Which is great, it actually proves my point even though you think it disproves it. emsjune took out her account in 1997 but Santander paid out even though they aren't liable. Fancyette's parents took the account out in 2003 but Santander rejected it. If Santander had wanted to with emsjune they could have rejected the case to the insurer as the card was taken out in 1997 but didn't bother, Santander paid out to emsjune inside 8 weeks even though they weren't liable as your own post statesFOS decisions published this year-re PPI polices sold with a Dorothy Perkins card in 1997
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=175270
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=175479
A very recent FOS decision April 2018
http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=178216
Again, both irrelevant as Santander paid outIt is not unusual to get a final response in 8 weeks. Latest data 2017 H2 shows Santander Insurance and Pure Protection: Percentage closed after 3 days but within 8 weeks 74% Percentage upheld 62% ..
Yes, but again, I must reiterate for the umpteenth time you are mixing up 2 people. Please note there are 2 different people involved in this post, 2 different cases, 2 different account dates etc. The date that one person took out the account is irrelevant to the otherSam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
Firstly, let's establish there isn't any confusion on my part. All my posts refer to the mis- selling of a PPI policy sold with a Dorothy Perkins store card in 1997 and were in response to your comments to emsjune78. I believe you had one of these deleted.Regardless of providing you with information that Santander do not have liability for the mis selling of PPI policies up to and including 14th January 2005(that’s pre regulation) -the FICL (the insurer) has taken responsibility, you continue to insist they do.No, again you are getting confused between the 2 posters on this thread, this is the problem with thread hijacking, 2 different cases, 2 different people, information getting mixed up. The person with the DP account (so Arcadia group, Santander taking liability) is emsjune78 who hijacked the thread halfway through. She complained to Santander who paid out after 8 weeks, the FOS were not involved. Fancyette has been time barred by Santander and has gone to the FOS, he/she was the first poster.[/i]
My posting of the links to FOS decisions were to try and explain to you that FICL(the insurers) have taken responsibility for the mis-sale of pre -2005 for GE store cards. You are aware of the lawsuit involving Axa, Genworth and Santander?
You have just contradicted yourselfWhich is great, it actually proves my point even though you think it disproves it. emsjune took out her account in 1997 but Santander paid out even though they aren't liable.[/i]
How does a bank "reject a case to an insurer".? So are you are saying that Santander are liable or not?If Santander had wanted to with emsjune they could have rejected the case to the insurer as the card was taken out in 1997 but didn't bother, Santander paid out to emsjune inside 8 weeks even though they weren't liable as your own post states
By using terminology such as "didn't bother" ," rejected to the insurer", "if they'd bothered to investigate", "A payment of refund after only 8 weeks without fuss",looked the the complaint, "decided not to fight it as payment was below whatever threshold they use and paid out, rather than deciding whether they were liable" , "1997 would be subject to the 6 year time bar and also pre-regulation complaint (and quite probably 3 year)" hardly reflects a good knowledge/understanding how financial firms Investigate, assess and resolve complaints.Yes, but again, I must reiterate for the umpteenth time you are mixing up 2 people. Please note there are 2 different people involved in this post, 2 different cases, 2 different account dates etc. The date that one person took out the account is irrelevant to the other
.0 -
Yes, but again, I must reiterate for the umpteenth time you are mixing up 2 people. Please note there are 2 different people involved in this post, 2 different cases, 2 different account dates etc. The date that one person took out the account is irrelevant to the other - Nasqueron
Thank you Nasqueron for stating that my original request has been HI-JACKED by another.
I just want to know for my parents, where should they go next now that Santander have rejected their claim.
Do they have a case to take their rejection to Ombudsman or not? Some advice would be appreciated.0 -
Your part of the thread ended with post #5 I'm afraid, after that another hijacked the thread. Luckily, your original query was already answered by post #3.I just want to know for my parents, where should they go next now that Santander have rejected their claim.
Do they have a case to take their rejection to Ombudsman or not? Some advice would be appreciated.
Good luck
0
![[Deleted User]](https://us-noi.v-cdn.net/6031891/uploads/defaultavatar/nFA7H6UNOO0N5.jpg)
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards