Santander PPI - Store Card

JFKR

Hi, I am currently working my way through possible PPI being connected to past accounts, for example I had a Top Shop account which I have approached Santander about.

1: They have said the outcome of my complaint is as follows :
Insurers AXA France IARD & AXA France VIE- portrayed the PPI as an optional extra not required for application to be accepted... not substantially flawed with grounds to conclude that I would have bought the policy in any event... that I was working a min of 16 hrs a week.

My recollection of getting a store card many years ago - When a store card/account would be offered to me at the counter when about to pay, I would reply that I didn't think I'd be accepted for a card etc. They would say that if you got their cover there should be no problem getting it through. They would then ring it through, pass the phone to me at a certain point, I would confirm my name, address & dob details, pass the phone back to the assistant & wait to hear if I had been accepted. I was always accepted in this way.
I am in the process of finding out if I was indeed working a min of 16 hrs at that time as I'm not sure that I was.

2: On a separate page & section of the letter it then focuses on SCUKL (Santander Cards Uk Ltd). The outcome of my complaint is as follows :
My complaint is time barred, I did not make a mis-selling claim within the 6 year time frame... 'Relevant Knowledge' I should have had the relevant knowledge by at least 1st Jan 2012 due to widespread coverage... I am time barred even if I've only just recently thought I had PPI.

Note: Same account number & same reference number for these 2 outcomes.

3: On a further separate page & section of the letter - Note: using the same account number but different reference number it then says :
They did not explain commission paid to them for selling PPI to me, which was more than 50%... offering me £135.70 in settlement.

My limited understanding of PPI has hindered me in going forward, with me originally thinking it was only something to do with big bank loans, and that was it. I've wised up a bit since then but my brain does not naturally find these matters easy to grasp.
Any guidance would be very very very much appreciated!

Nasqueron

JFKR wrote: »

Hi, I am currently working my way through possible PPI being connected to past accounts, for example I had a Top Shop account which I have approached Santander about.

1: They have said the outcome of my complaint is as follows :
Insurers AXA France IARD & AXA France VIE- portrayed the PPI as an optional extra not required for application to be accepted... not substantially flawed with grounds to conclude that I would have bought the policy in any event... that I was working a min of 16 hrs a week.

Just shows you were suitable for the cover, therefore not miss-sold

JFKR wrote: »

My recollection of getting a store card many years ago - When a store card/account would be offered to me at the counter when about to pay, I would reply that I didn't think I'd be accepted for a card etc. They would say that if you got their cover there should be no problem getting it through. They would then ring it through, pass the phone to me at a certain point, I would confirm my name, address & dob details, pass the phone back to the assistant & wait to hear if I had been accepted. I was always accepted in this way.
I am in the process of finding out if I was indeed working a min of 16 hrs at that time as I'm not sure that I was.

Provide proof of this memory. Or provide proof you were working less than 16 hours. Then ask them to look again

JFKR wrote: »

2: On a separate page & section of the letter it then focuses on SCUKL (Santander Cards Uk Ltd). The outcome of my complaint is as follows :
My complaint is time barred, I did not make a mis-selling claim within the 6 year time frame... 'Relevant Knowledge' I should have had the relevant knowledge by at least 1st Jan 2012 due to widespread coverage... I am time barred even if I've only just recently thought I had PPI.

Note: Same account number & same reference number for these 2 outcomes.

Standard Santander response now, you should have complained earlier, the PPI miss-selling scandal has been going on for the best part of 9 years...

JFKR wrote: »

3: On a further separate page & section of the letter - Note: using the same account number but different reference number it then says :
They did not explain commission paid to them for selling PPI to me, which was more than 50%... offering me £135.70 in settlement.

My limited understanding of PPI has hindered me in going forward, with me originally thinking it was only something to do with big bank loans, and that was it. I've wised up a bit since then but my brain does not naturally find these matters easy to grasp.
Any guidance would be very very very much appreciated!

It's nothing to do with limited understanding, your complaint has been time barred because you didn't complain within the legal time frame but you have got some Plevin commission

Bermonia

You have two letters as the sale was not regulated when it occurred as such Santander’s ‘timebar’ letter merely informs you (poorly) that a complaint cannot be considered against them, however they were required to consider Plevin commission guidance and as such you received a small refund.

Your other letter from Santander is on behalf of the insurer who has kindly agreed that they will take responsibility for this sale (as they hold no paperwork investigation and response is done by Santander on their behalf).

Hope this helps clarify matters - regrettably their letters do not make this very clear.

JFKR

Thank you Bermonia, I appreciate your input helping me to understand the 3 parts to this one big letter. The tone & wording from Santander regarding my 'Relevant Knowledge' - should have had the relevant knowledge of PPI by at least 1st Jan 2012 due to widespread coverage etc etc - felt rather damning due to difficult circumstances where getting through the day had been my priority & focus, my confusion as I try to check/claim today unfortunately represents my limited understanding at the time & up until quite recently.
I have seen quite a lot of people being patronised on here merely for not understanding/knowing how this all works whilst trying to work through it all before the deadline comes, so your answer & kind tone was very much appreciated by me, thank you.

JFKR

Nasqueron - Thank you for replying.