PPI Reclaims not covered by the FOS

donna1977_2

Hi this is my first post so please bare with me,my partner took an an HP agreement in July 2004 with first response finance ltd to purchase a motorbike,he was told by the salesperson before he signed the contract that taking out the ppi was essential to him getting the credit,after coming across this site i downloaded the first template letter and sent it off a week later we got a response basically saying that my partner was not mis-sold the policy and giving me the Fla`s lending code booklet,any advice on my next move would be greatly appreciated.I have tried to post the links to the letter below but im not very good with posting links so it may not work.

donna1977_2

http://i626.photobucket.com/albums/tt347/lavenderangel_album/fr1.jpg

http://i626.photobucket.com/albums/tt347/lavenderangel_album/fr2.jpg

there i think i got it right this time!

Yeah i did!!As i said I'm unsure whether to send them another stronger letter along the lines of template two and threaten court action but as i am not educated in the field of law is is rather daunting taking on big firm unless i know that i have a leg to stand on by threatening court action,i thought the letter was very cheeky as my partner fully recalls 2004 and the day he signed the contract,i was in fact with him and was witness to the salespersons act of misleading my partner into taking the ppi.

donna1977_2

Anyone?

petermb_2

Hi Donna,
You really do need a pro to settle this matter for you. The only way you are going to win your case is through potential litigation but you need to know what you are doing to succeed. Most solicitors are not up with the legislation in these matters.

There are issues surrounding ppi where the lender has no legs to stand on other than simply mis-selling and I would go that route.

donna1977_2

Thank-you Peter,this site is amazing,it helps empower normal everyday people who may not be fortunate enough to have much knowledge of the law,sometimes you feel like a lamb to the slaughter when dealing with big companies and it`s a great feeling knowing there are people out there helping the fight for the little people,thank-you for your help it is very much appreciated.

donna1977_2

I sent a second stronger letter via email today,based around template two from this site,got a quick response saying they would look into my complaint again and i would recieve a response next week,here`s hoping!Will keep posting any new developments.

donna1977_2

i am awaiting a final response from first response finance today regarding my claim for mis-sold ppi,im not getting my hopes up but after reading into the matter further i am very optimistic that i WILL win our case even id i have to go through the courts.I ts amazing how empowered you feel when you educate yourself on your consumer rights

donna1977_2

As expected first response have sent a final response basically trying to say the responsibility of misselling falls with the dealership where my bike was aquired from,i am now seeking further legal advice on the matter....it`s time for the big guns!i will post any further developments.

petermb_2

The lenders say stuff like this alot. It is of course nonesense and there just to bluff. Mind you I |do think that some of them really are oblivious to their responsibilities but ignorance is no excuse.

whodoitaketocourt

Looking through this forum, it looks like, in the last 2 years, no-one has successfully managed to get a refund for PPI from a company not regulated by the FOS - is that correct ?

I'm in a similar situation to most on here - i.e. large (£40K) secured loan with First National (now GE Money) via a broker. All paid off a few years ago now when I remortgaged, but it had extortionate PPI lumped-in at the beginning (despite apparantly lasting for 5 years of cover), would not have been suitable for me as I was self employed (the broker specialised in cases such as mine as they were suggested by the Federation of Small Businesses) but I was told that the loan would only be approved if I included PPI. Both the broker and GE say they were not regulated by the FOS, suggesting the FLA instead, and blame each other. As we all know, the FLA has no teeth, and certainly no power to force them to pay, so is useless.

Can anyone convince me that it's worth still fighting or is this a completely lost cause ? Maybe it's something that Martin could take-up/look into as these non-FOS PPI cases seem to be affecting a lot of people out there and none of us seem to be geting anywhere.

Thanks