We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Appealing PPI decision

i have used a company to reclaim my PPI which has been rejected, they have advised i appeal, but what i want to know is if i appeal without them, as in i do it personally and am successful, will i still have to pay them their 20% ??
advice gratefully received
Comments
-
i have used a company to reclaim my PPI which has been rejected, they have advised i appeal, but what i want to know is if i appeal without them, as in i do it personally and am successful, will i still have to pay them their 20% ?
So, although it is your own choice whether to "appeal" the rejection or not, you cannot refer this complaint without also involving the firm. You've signed away your ability to act alone.
Therefore, if you are eventually awarded redress, you will indeed get a bill for 20% of the gross amount plus VAT.
Sorry.
Out of interest, what was your complaint and why was it rejected?0 -
hi
thanks for your input, it was the answer i was expecting. the rejection was about sick pay at my employment at the time, although if they had given me the date i took out PPI i would have been able to supply the correct info as i was 3 years out in my estimation of when i did take it out. fortunately when the PPI was taken out i was in a job with full sick pay etc so i do expect the rejection to be reversed.0 -
How are you defining 'full sick pay'?
I wouldn't expect the rejection to be reversed on that basis.0 -
For a credit card or short loan, NHS levels of sick pay (6 months full, 6 months half) would work. If you are talking about normal company pay, you will rarely find firms offering much more than a couple of weeks - a month before you go onto SSP and this is not sufficient to win a complaint
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 -
i was lucky that i had SSP plus the difference between that and my wage made up for by my company for a year then my company insurance paid out full pay till i pop my clogs0
-
i was 3 years out in my estimation of when i did take it out.i was lucky that i had SSP plus the difference between that and my wage made up for by my company for a year0
-
I'd assume you could also provide some sort of evidence in the form of HMRC tax returns too as that sort of BIK would be a taxable benefit
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
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.8K Life & Family
- 257.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards