HFC loan - PPI policy document

-taff

So I looked at the website for HFC in 2005 [used the Internet Wayback Machine] and found this
"Hamilton Insurance Company Limited and Hamilton Life Assurance Company Limited are subsidiaries of HFC Bank Limited and offer Payment Protection Insurance to support HFC Bank's range of personal secured and unsecured loans, credit cards and retail loans."
But that's as far as I was willing to go so maybe that's of use, maybe it isn't.

[Deleted User]

NHD wrote: »

My question is simply to try and find out if HFC PPI policies did indeed (typically) have a 6 or 12 month cap, as the FOS is suggesting.

Is the Ombudsman just "suggesting" this is the case, or are they stating it as fact? If the former, then there may be some mileage in attempting to prove them wrong. If the latter, I would suggest that any further research on your part is only going to confirm what you've already been told.

Note also that any successful complaint redress would have the six months of payments you received 13 years ago deducted from it.

What reason did the Bank give for rejecting the complaint initially?

dunstonh

Never come across a policy covering just 6 months. The generic norm is 12 months. A very small number went to 24 months.

[Deleted User]

dunstonh wrote: »

The generic norm is 12 months. A very small number went to 24 months.

Yeah, OP seems have complained expecting it to run for the remaining term of the loan (60 months). I've never heard of any PPI policy paying out for five years.

Bermonia

Many Lloyds loan policies would pay out up to term of loan for accident and sickness... few others out there too but not many were so generous

NHD

dunstonh wrote: »

Never come across a policy covering just 6 months. The generic norm is 12 months. A very small number went to 24 months.

Interesting. My wife had some PPI claims about 10 years ago. Barclaycard paid for 33 months. Lloyds and EGG also paid out for remaining term of the respective loan (there was no limit).

NHD

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Yeah, OP seems have complained expecting it to run for the remaining term of the loan (60 months). I've never heard of any PPI policy paying out for five years.

That may indeed be true, but 6 months seems incredibly short - and I would suggest an unusual example of 'mis-selling'.

NHD

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Is the Ombudsman just "suggesting" this is the case, or are they stating it as fact? If the former, then there may be some mileage in attempting to prove them wrong. If the latter, I would suggest that any further research on your part is only going to confirm what you've already been told.

Note also that any successful complaint redress would have the six months of payments you received 13 years ago deducted from it.

What reason did the Bank give for rejecting the complaint initially?

They have accepted there was PPI. However (since they stopped payments after 6 months) the maths runs against us. The 6 months payments are more than the premiums paid (+8% compound interest). No redress is due. The PROBLEM I have - hence the question - is why the payouts stopped after 6 months. No other banks have behaved this way. Sadly we don't have the original agreement, and of course HSBC/HFC don't really have an incentive to produce the document, but there must be some archive paperwork / data file somewhere.

NHD

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Interest is simple, not compound, on PPI redress.

Sorry, my mistake.

[Deleted User]

NHD wrote: »

I would suggest an unusual example of 'mis-selling'.

Only if the PPI policy was supposed to pay out for longer, of course.

I can't imagine any other reason why the payout stopped when it did. Why didn't you complain at the time, I wonder? Could it be because you then knew it was only designed to pay for that period and have since forgotten?