Time barred complaint but a settlement figure anyway?

mermaidtail

Hello, I am new to the forums and recently I made some PPI complaints about some store cards I had 20 years ago. Today I recevied a letter from Santander about my old Debenhams card taken out in 1999. It is 7 pages stapled together. The letter says that I the PPI was not suitable for me and I have recieved a settlement figure and a form to return back to them with my bank details etc.


The last two pages are another letter (stapled to the letter with the settlement figure) saying that my complaint against Santander Cards Uk Limited is time barred because it is over 15 years old.


I just don't quite understand why they have sent me two letters one offering me a settlement and the other saying it is time barred. Just to reiterate these letters both came in the same envelope stapled togther.



Does anyone know why this might be?

Nasqueron

There's been another person here who had the 15 year rule quoted at them. It could just be a mistake, I'd ring up and ask them whether they are paying or time barring it.

brown1950

Sorry i do not understand a 15 year time bar. Perhaps somebody could explain ?

dunstonh

There is a 15 year rule is if you use the courts. There is no 15 year rule using the FCA regulated complaints process.

I have seen posts from others suggesting that cases that fall under the FLA have a 15-year time bar. However, that is outside my area of knowledge.

brown1950

Sorry have never seen a 15 year limitation rule via the courts in respect of credit card PPI complaints or debts
Perhaps you would kindly point me to the court ruling you refer to ?

antrobus

brown1950 wrote: »

Sorry have never seen a 15 year limitation rule via the courts in respect of credit card PPI complaints or debts
Perhaps you would kindly point me to the court ruling you refer to ?

S14B Limitation Act 1980

Overriding time limit for negligence actions not involving personal injuries.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58

emsjune78

mermaidtail wrote: »

Hello, I am new to the forums and recently I made some PPI complaints about some store cards I had 20 years ago. Today I recevied a letter from Santander about my old Debenhams card taken out in 1999. It is 7 pages stapled together. The letter says that I the PPI was not suitable for me and I have recieved a settlement figure and a form to return back to them with my bank details etc.


The last two pages are another letter (stapled to the letter with the settlement figure) saying that my complaint against Santander Cards Uk Limited is time barred because it is over 15 years old.


I just don't quite understand why they have sent me two letters one offering me a settlement and the other saying it is time barred. Just to reiterate these letters both came in the same envelope stapled togther.



Does anyone know why this might be?

I had the same thing from Santander a few weeks back on an old storecard from 1997. The upheld decision was them reviewing the complaint on behalf of the insurer. If you look at the two letters they should be worded slightly differently as to who they are considering the complaint on behalf of. My timebar letter was for Santander Cards UK limited and this was stapled to the back of the other letter. So they'd reviewed the complaint from both aspects at the same time.

I believe your complaint has been successful and you will just need to return the acceptance form to them before they will then transfer the settlement amount or raise a cheque depending on your preference. Maybe just ring them for peace of mind but they were very quick with mine. It was paid within a couple of days of returning the form. Hope this helps

brown1950

Wrong part of limitation act quoted
Negligence does not apply in this case.

dunstonh

Why don't you post the part that does apply then rather than trying to troll others?

In civil actions in the courts, there is usually an overall "long-stop" requirement that the matter complained about should have happened within the last 15-years. This limitation does not apply to complaints to the ombudsman. There is no 15-year "long-stop" rule in the complaints-handling rules made under the Financial Services and Markets Act and the Consumer Credit Act.

So, this is why the FCA regulated complaints process does not have a 15 year long stop whereas the courts do.

antrobus

brown1950 wrote: »

Wrong part of limitation act quoted
Negligence does not apply in this case.

OP alleges the mis-sale of PPI. Mis-selling is negligence.

brown1950

So are you saying that a Company can use in Court as a defence for a monetary claim
such as a PPI refund clause SB14 Limitation Act based on the negligent action of the Company's employee's ?