SCUKL time barred

tshirtsuntan

Hello everyone

I am hope to get a little understanding on a reply regarding my ppi complaint on a new look store card.

I received a reply from Santander advising my complaint against the insurer Financial Assurance company has been upheld.

However there is a 2ND letter stapled to the back of this one regarding the same card and dated the same date advising my complaint against SCUKL is rejected due to being under general legal principles I had 15 years to complain from point of sale.

I guess my confusion is how is one part upheld and the other not on the same card that has been running the same length of time.

Sorry if I am sounding stupid.And apologies if I am lacking any information

Thank you.

Nasqueron

Is there any mention of unfair relationships/commission etc?


It may be that they are going to pay under Plevin, or pay a part of the refund but the 15 year rule is being quoted more often by Santander now who are not accepting responsibility for cases regarding cards sold so long ago when it was nothing to do with them.

tshirtsuntan

Hi Nasqueron

Thanks for taking then time to reply .


There is no mention of commission etc.
From what I can make out they have dealt with my complaint on behalf of the insurer and found in my favour yet my complaint concerning Santander cards is rejected under this time bar they refer to.

I cannot understand why my complaint is towards Santander though as if it's the insurer. That was responsible .

Either way I will take it to the Ombudsman purely on the basis that I do not know what the 15 year time bar is all about.

I won't get my knickers in a twist over it though
as the redress is only 12 quid !!!!

befair

I had the same thing and ignored the second one stapled on the back, sent the acceptance back from the first letter and got paid within 7 days! In my case it was about £700.

Presumably Santander are doing the review for the storecard provider and the PPI insurer and so that's why there's two letters.....but £12 doesn't sound much. if it's that old there should be a lot of interest. I my case I'd paid about £40 and the rest was interest!

Bermonia

Effectively the seller was Santander (or one of its entities) however at the time of the sale they were not regulated hence your complaint against SCUKL is time barred.

However the insurer Financial Insurance Company Limited has accepted responsibility on this occasion as they were regulated.

Santander will respond and act on behalf of Financial Insurance Limited as such if you have already received a full uphold redress offer then this would cover the full PPI premiums paid towards the card for its entirety.

This ‘relationship’ isn’t common so can be confusing as the letters do not make it sufficiently clear enough.

Hope this helps!