Employment status and PPI

3 Posts
Evening Experts!
A quick question.
I have just had a claim for PPI denied. The letter I received stated that the PPI policy required that I was in 'permanent' employment, I was employed by an agency at the time. My question is, does agency work qualify as permanent work?
Cheers
A quick question.
I have just had a claim for PPI denied. The letter I received stated that the PPI policy required that I was in 'permanent' employment, I was employed by an agency at the time. My question is, does agency work qualify as permanent work?
Cheers
0
Latest MSE News and Guides
Childcare budget boost
More support for children from nine months and those on Universal Credit
MSE News
Replies
So why was your complaint declined?
The letter says that they believe the policy would have been of use to me. In fairness, when they sent the questionnaire I just ticked the 'unknown' box to everything which was the most honest thing I could do. They then kept calling wanting more info but I felt this was a ploy to tie me in knots so I declined - it was actually during one of these calls that they informed me who I was employed by, at this point I argued that they already knew more than me and left it at that.
So, should I contact them (MBNA) again and point out that I was an agency worker or should I go to the ombudsman?
Cheers
As you chose not to, they went with what they had.
If you haven't yet had their final response, give them a call and see if they'll give you a second chance. However, it may now have to go to the Ombudsman.
I'll try talking to MBNA but failing that then the ombudsman.
Cheers
You need to remember that it is you that is the one alleging wrongdoing from 21 and 18 years ago. It could also be viewed as being utterly ridiculous for you to make allegations after all this time that you cannot prove.
Most of the banks had a database of employer benefits built up over the near 20 years of people complaining. Where you allege you have employer benefits as a complaint reason and the bank either has no records on that employer or if you claim to have benefits that are different to what they have on their records then its normal for them to ask you for evidence to support your allegation.
But none of that actually confirms you had employer-provided sickness benefit. It could easily just be SSP.
It depends on what your complaint reasons are and if any other complaint reasons exist that can be evidenced or if any other wrongdoing is found. In reality, without evidence, it will likely be that any wrongdoing alleged by you in that particular area will be disregarded. However, if you have alleged that you had 6 or 12 months employed provided sick pay and evidence is found that you only had 1 month or none then it could damage you. Obviously it would eliminate that as a complaint reason but it would also make you unreliable. So, on decisions that need a balance of probability decision to be made (which happens quite often), these tend to go with the most credible side. You are not expected to remember everything but if you have worded your complaint as if you have perfect recollection but that all falls apart under scrutiny, then that is really the only time it can do any damage in other areas.
it's spelt d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y
there - 'in or at that place'
their - 'owned by them'
they're - 'they are'
it's bought not brought (i just bought my chicken a suit from that new shop for £6.34)
It's not ridiculous for them to ask in order to find something to support your complaint, especially if it was as weak as saying you didn't know you had it.