PPI Company fee prior to July

MNORTH

Hello,
Firstly I have just received a successful PPI claim via a claims company. It's great but thier charge of 39% + 20% VAT is not only more than stated but is extortionate

Now, we all know of the cap that has come into place in July 2018 setting the max fee at 20%. This is the gov/reg body stating the reasonable maximum rate that can be charged for the work conducted by these companies.
I now come to the next part as of april 2018 I quote
CMCs will be required to ensure all charges are reasonable and to provide clients with an itemised bill setting out details reflecting the work undertaken and what the charges relate to where a contract is cancelled after the 14-day ‘cooling off’ period.

I signed for this a matter of weeks prior to the imposed cap in June.

My question is how, at any time, can the claims company now state that their rates are reasonable when the gov/reg body has stated otherwise.

I am currently in the process of fighting this, anyone have some insights into this.

I will also add that I did not receive a breakdown or itemised billing of the work carried out as required. When I was cold called to be sold this policy It was stated 30% fee and I was pushed to sign and only check my information (heinsight indeed). No mention of the VAT etc.

Nasqueron

You can ask, then complain and see where you get

However, you signed when the fee was 39%, a change in the law after that isn't necessarily retrospective

dunstonh

I signed for this a matter of weeks prior to the imposed cap in June.

So, your contract is not affected by the new requirements in any way.

I will also add that I did not receive a breakdown or itemised billing of the work carried out as required.

They are not required to do so.

When I was cold called to be sold this policy It was stated 30% fee and I was pushed to sign and only check my information (heinsight indeed). No mention of the VAT etc.

its not a policy. You bought a service. The VAT would have been quoted on the contract you signed.

MNORTH

So, your contract is not affected by the new requirements in any way.

Due to

"CMCs will be required to ensure all charges are reasonable" See below post for the full.

The Gov/Reg body decided that a reasonable Maximum charge of commission for the work undertaken by these companies on our behalf is 20%.

How can they justify that their charges are reasonable against the new regs.
I signed after april, this falls under if the charges are reasonable or not. Proof lies that they are unreasonable as they are above the regulatory bodies reasonable rate of 20%

They are not required to do so.

As stated look at the CMR special bulletin from the gov web site.

Specifically

CMCs will be required to ensure all charges are reasonable and to provide clients with an itemised bill setting out details reflecting the work undertaken and what the charges relate to where a contract is cancelled after the 14-day ‘cooling off’ period.

Implemented as of april 2018 (if im correct)

The full is as follows ( I can't post links yet)

This special bulletin is intended to provide information to claims management companies (CMCs) on recent announcements made in relation to the fees CMCs can charge for financial products and services claims.

1. Financial Guidance and Claims Bill: interim fee cap
On 21 November 2017, a Government amendment was passed in the House of Lords at Third Reading of the Bill providing for a cap on fees that CMCs and legal services providers can charge claimants for claims management services in relation to PPI claims.

The Government has decided to legislate for a cap in advance of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) taking over responsibility for claims management regulation and to set this cap at 20% (excluding VAT) of the claim value. The intention is that the cap would be introduced two months after the Bill receives Royal Assent which, subject to Parliamentary approval, is expected to be by March 2018. This interim cap would remain in place until the FCA exercises its own fee-capping duty under Clause 17 of the Bill.

The fee cap will be enforced by the CMR in respect of CMCs and the legal service regulators in respect of law firms. The Financial Guidance and Claims Bill will now be passed to the House of Commons for consideration. The progress of the Bill can be followed on the Parliament website where you can sign up for email alerts.

2. CMR consultation response: rule changes to be implemented from April 2018
On 15 November, we published the consultation response in relation to proposals first outlined in 2016 to place restrictions on the level of fees that regulated CMCs can charge for financial services claims.

The report explains how the responses received informed our conclusions, and announces the intention to implement the following measures via changes to the Conduct of Authorised Persons Rules 2014:

Fees must not be charged to a client prior to the conclusion of a PPI claim. Fees for any other financial products and services claims must not be charged prior to the provision of any regulated claims management services (excluding advertising for, or otherwise seeking out) to the client.

A ban on any charges to a client where it is identified that the client does not have a relationship or relevant policy with the lender(s) for which a claim is submitted on their behalf.

CMCs will be required to ensure all charges are reasonable and to provide clients with an itemised bill setting out details reflecting the work undertaken and what the charges relate to where a contract is cancelled after the 14-day ‘cooling off’ period.

Amended Client Specific Rule 16: A business, unless subject to Regulation 8 of the Damages Based Agreements Regulations 2013, must permit the client to cancel a contract at any time. Any charge to the client must be limited to what is reasonable and must reflect work undertaken by the business. Where there is a contract for a financial product and services claim the business must provide the client with an itemised bill that evidences the regulated claims management services provided and how the fees have been calculated before obtaining payment details and before any payment can be taken.

The new rules will come into effect on 1 April 2018. All CMCs offering financial claims services in England and Wales are required to adhere to these rules as a condition of authorisation in accordance with Regulation 12(5) of the Compensation (Claims Management Services) Regulations 2006. Failure to adhere to the rules would be subject to enforcement action.

Further guidance will be issued in due course on the implementation of the interim fee cap and the above rule changes.

Nasqueron

Does it say in that text that it applies to cases retrospectively or just going forward

dunstonh

How can they justify that their charges are reasonable against the new regs.
I signed after april, this falls under if the charges are reasonable or not. Proof lies that they are unreasonable as they are above the regulatory bodies reasonable rate of 20%

Regulation changes are a line in the sand. You are the wrong side of it.

CMCs will be required to ensure all charges are reasonable and to provide clients with an itemised bill setting out details reflecting the work undertaken and what the charges relate to where a contract is cancelled after the 14-day ‘cooling off’ period.

Implemented as of april 2018 (if im correct)

That is correct if they wish to levy a charge during the cancellation rights period. You didnt cancel within that period.

MNORTH

Where there is a contract for a financial product and services claim the business must provide the client with an itemised bill that evidences the regulated claims management services provided and how the fees have been calculated before obtaining payment details and before any payment can be taken.

MNORTH

Some of this is quite confusing tbh.

Though with a bit of reading, It is feasible that they have at least breached the Claims Management Regulation Conduct of Authorised Persons Rules 2018 under the General Rules: Principles 1. A business shall conduct itself with honesty and integrity

Knowing this was to come into affect in July, as it was outlined and passed into legislation 2 months prior without informing the client, brings into question if they are acting with honesty and integrity. If I was informed, or any other client, we would of surely awaiting the few weeks (or in other cases
2 months) before submitting the claim.

I am quite sure thier are some grounds here, I am more than sure I got done over big time on this

I have also read that thier may be, in the future, potential for "refunds" on over charged commision fees (I can see the ads now)

[Deleted User]

MNORTH wrote: »

I have also read that thier may be, in the future, potential for "refunds" on over charged commision fees (I can see the ads now)

Good luck with that..

dunstonh

Where there is a contract for a financial product and services claim the business must provide the client with an itemised bill that evidences the regulated claims management services provided and how the fees have been calculated before obtaining payment details and before any payment can be taken.

No they dont. Not in the way you are thinking anyway.

Knowing this was to come into affect in July, as it was outlined and passed into legislation 2 months prior without informing the client, brings into question if they are acting with honesty and integrity. If I was informed, or any other client, we would of surely awaiting the few weeks (or in other cases
2 months) before submitting the claim.

Line in the sand. You seem to be struggling with that concept.

If you had a road that was 60mph and the council said they intend to drop it to 30mph in 4 weeks time, should the police be allowed to issue speeding tickets to all those that went 60mph in the four weeks before as they knew it was going to drop to 30mph?

I am quite sure thier are some grounds here, I am more than sure I got done over big time on this

I suggest you seek proper legal advice before you try taking them to court.

I have also read that thier may be, in the future, potential for "refunds" on over charged commision fees (I can see the ads now)

That right already exists and CMCs were warned about it in 2014. However, that isnt what is happening here.

MNORTH

Damn, Well Thankyou, looks like as many others shall be... up the creek without a paddle.

Though I did read about something else for refunds, due to this cap... thats why I said, I can see the ads now lol