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.
Plevin ppi case Santander
Any advice?
Comments
-
Just wait for them to work through the other 24,657,652 complaints and they will eventually get round to yours.0
-
I explained the advice from the FCA, but again was told they were all on hold. I asked for this to be put in writing, but this was refused.
Any advice?
be patient. They will get around to you. And be thankful that every day they leave it, more interest is added.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0 -
I submitted mine the back end of last year after they wrote to me regarding the matter and still waiting, having rang and been told they had submitted over 22k letters i have rang and been told dept dealing with it are not taking calls.. so still sat waitingBelieve you can win and you shall win !!!
Wins for 2010-£2450 2011-£6100 2012-£4500
2013-£3800 2014-£1200 2015 - £6500 2016-£2500 2017 - champagne £250 shopkins toys vodka spotify vouchers book0 -
And every person chasing them up slows it down even more.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0
-
Sadly the money grubbing nature of people, often promoted by sites like this means every man and his dog will be trying to get more money, I bet half of them either didn't have PPI or had a refund and didn't read the article, just saw the £££ signs and put in another complaint delaying even further
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 -
Sadly the money grubbing nature of people, often promoted by sites like this means every man and his dog will be trying to get more money, I bet half of them either didn't have PPI or had a refund and didn't read the article, just saw the £££ signs and put in another complaint delaying even further
it is true. It has been reported for many years that over half of complaints made do not actually have PPI. Yet many of those still make all the usual allegations of wrongdoing. Many of these generated by CMCs. (which are another symptom of greed)I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0 -
To be fair, the complaint being "chased" by the latest OP in this thread was generated by the Bank itself writing to tell him about Plevin. While it's true general PPI complaints are often chancers who didn't even have the insurance, Plevin complaints are far more likely to have some genuine substance.It has been reported for many years that over half of complaints made do not actually have PPI. Yet many of those still make all the usual allegations of wrongdoing.
We should be careful of putting off those genuinely disadvantaged by PPI (and Plevin) when we disparage those seeking what they obviously see as a free-for-all.0 -
Its easy to forget that banks sold millions of these policies to people who never had any hope of any benefit from them, those who never knew they had them in the first place, then their are the ones who were told it was compulsory.
If anyone was money grabbing, it was 100% the banks, who blatantly lied to there customers on a massive scale, there have been no apologies, no banker ever went to court, or jail, they just carried on with the same contemptuous attitude they always had even making us jump through hoops in order to get our money back.
If it was you or I mis-selling policies to the public, we would end up doing time, but not the banks, I say good luck to anyone who gets there money back from these leeches.I’m a Forum Ambassador and I support the Forum Team on the Debt free wannabe, Credit file and ratings, and Bankruptcy and living with it boards. If you need any help on these boards, do let me know. Please note that Ambassadors are not moderators. Any posts you spot in breach of the Forum Rules should be reported via the report button, or by emailing forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com. All views are my own and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.For free non-judgemental debt advice, contact either Stepchange, National Debtline, or CitizensAdviceBureaux.Link to SOA Calculator- https://www.stoozing.com/soa.php The "provit letter" is here-https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2607247/letter-when-you-know-nothing-about-about-the-debt-aka-prove-it-letter0 -
While I don't disagree with anything you've said here, the earlier criticism was of the large number of obviously vexatious and invalid "complaints" received from people who weren't mis-sold anything at all!sourcrates wrote: »I say good luck to anyone who gets there money back from these leeches.
The point is that such "complaints" only cause more delay for those who were mis-sold.0 -
sourcrates wrote: »Its easy to forget that banks sold millions of these policies to people who never had any hope of any benefit from them, those who never knew they had them in the first place, then their are the ones who were told it was compulsory.
If anyone was money grabbing, it was 100% the banks, who blatantly lied to there customers on a massive scale, there have been no apologies, no banker ever went to court, or jail, they just carried on with the same contemptuous attitude they always had even making us jump through hoops in order to get our money back.
If it was you or I mis-selling policies to the public, we would end up doing time, but not the banks, I say good luck to anyone who gets there money back from these leeches.
It's easy to forget most of the miss-selling was NOT done by banks but rather through channels such as store cards, finance for cars through dealers etc. Ranting about banks for a CIVIL issue (not a legal one) doesn't help. I agree there should be more action against banks and other finance firms but ONLY if there is equal action against both CMCs and customers who knowingly submit false claims for compensation. Far too much money has been paid out for dubious, even outright false, complaints from people who only see £££. People like me who have the sense to simply refuse these insurance packages lose out through fewer benefits offered to us while people who quite probably agreed to the package and then simply forgot or perhaps even deliberately pretend otherwise get paid large sums. The day a salesman who lied about PPI goes to jail, the person joining them should be someone who lied about having PPI and demanding money back.
My point on this topic is that people who do appear to have been miss-sold are not getting their money back because the system is clogged up with fraudulent claims from people pretending to be miss-sold.
When the next downturn comes, perhaps as soon as Brexit is finished, hundreds of thousands people will be in financial trouble and the insurance policy that could have covered their payments for their home will have been cancelled because CMCs and indeed, this site, have encouraged people to grub for refunds of packages that could be useful and will MSE or any firm put their hands up and apologise? No they'll have moved onto the next topic de jour trying to get money for nothingSam 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
- 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

