We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Barclaycard/Egg - Plevin
I had a couple of Barclaycards and an Egg card back in the 90s. I tried claiming for it and got turned down as they claimed it wasn't mis-sold. At the time I requested they look at Plevin too and they said they were waiting for the FCA to rule on it.
I did this via Resolver and I think I escalated it correctly to the FCA, although nothing has happened since. This was about a year ago. It resulted in 2 separate claims being raised with Barclays.
Then in January I got a message from Barclaycard out of the blue saying they were going to pay me a sum for one of the claims (I don't know which one is which as they haven't told me) for Plevin.
Since then I've been trying to get them to look at the other claim under Plevin, but might as well be talking to a brick wall. Every attempt just gets a reply along the lines of "We investigated it and gave our decision and that was over 6 months ago so tough". Even though their decision on Plevin was "we can't decide yet as the FCA haven't ruled". Every correspondance is met with the same response because there is no new information supplied and they clearly don't actually read the letters I send.
I've just tried a different route of a PPI Commission form on their website, but does anyone have any other suggestion for getting them to not be so bloody stupid and actually do something about it?
Thanks!
Comments
-
Do you know for sure the second one is covered under plevin (look at the time frames it covers) or if the commission was high enough to qualify?
Sam 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 know for sure the second one is covered under plevin (look at the time frames it covers) or if the commission was high enough to qualify?
No I'm not sure, I am basing it on 2 things:
1 - The reason for not paying it was because they were waiting for the FCA ruling.
2 - They have paid on Plevin for my other card, which I held at the same time.0 -
Did you open the 2 cards together at the same time in the same way? It is possible one has Plevin, one doesn't. Worth checking with FOS but if Barclays rejected the complaint 6 months ago and are not considering Plevin then the case is over
Sam 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 -
I don't remember if I opened them at the same time. I've no idea if it's possible that they had different commission rates.
Perhaps I'm not explaining it properly. Barclays rejected the "normal" complaint, and said they could not comment on Plevin because they were waiting for the FCA to rule. They said this on both complaints.
They then subsequently paid out on Plevin on one claim, but won't look at the other claim simply because they have already looked at it and denied it and there is no new information.
My argument is that they declined to comment on Plevin and therefore now should, as the FCA have now ruled, but I can't get them to even acknowledge anything as they just say "We have already decided", when they actually haven't.0 -
In any case the reason they declined the main claim was unfair in my opinion. How can I check if my Resolver case is actually making any progress after escalation?0
-
In any case the reason they declined the main claim was unfair in my opinion. How can I check if my Resolver case is actually making any progress after escalation?
If they reject your complaint they give you access to the FOS to use within 6 months, then it's time barred.
I understand what you are saying about Plevin but if it doesn't apply then it doesn't apply - how the PPI was sold is key e.g. ticking a box on a website to say you wanted it or added on by a sales adviser when card is activatedSam 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 -
The FCA ruled, and it's possible one card may be in scope for Plevin, the other might not.. . said they could not comment on Plevin because they were waiting for the FCA to rule.
No one here can say without more details.0 -
I agree.societys_child wrote: »The FCA ruled, and it's possible one card may be in scope for Plevin, the other might not.
No one here can say without more details.
While the cards may well have been opened at the same time, perhaps one was closed earlier and so is not in scope for Plevin?
As you say, we can only speculate without more information.
As to "escalation" via Resolver, many have reported that the intended recipient (in this case FOS, not FCA) never received complaints via the E-Mail template.
Best course of action for the OP would be to contact the Ombudsman (FOS) who should also be able to clarify why one Plevin refund was granted while the other was rejected and also adjudicate on the phantom "escalation" from which the OP has heard nothing.0 -
Moneyineptitude wrote: »I agree.
While the cards may well have been opened at the same time, perhaps one was closed earlier and so is not in scope for Plevin?
As you say, we can only speculate without more information.
As to "escalation" via Resolver, many have reported that the intended recipient (in this case FOS, not FCA) never received complaints via the E-Mail template.
Best course of action for the OP would be to contact the Ombudsman (FOS) who should also be able to clarify why one Plevin refund was granted while the other was rejected and also adjudicate on the phantom "escalation" from which the OP has heard nothing.
Thanks for this.
Would you happen to know the best channel for contacting FOS in this instance?0 -
Thanks for this.
Would you happen to know the best channel for contacting FOS in this instance?
Bottom of this page
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/ppi/how-do-i-complain.htmlSam 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
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards