PPI Claim, am I too late?

ljt84

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

Very much less. I shopped around a bought directly. MPPI commission was and still is a low percentage. Are you understanding PPI any better yet?

I'd read up on the PPI reclaim on MSE site, that's enough for me. I had an edge case where I went separately for PPI as you saw and commented on in my own thread. As suspected I don't have a case, so I won't pursue it.

I have however put a complaint in on my old credit card which had PPI from my previous bank. If I get anything then great, if not, then no loss other than a 5 minute form filling in.

I'm of the mindset of no harm in trying to claim something, whereas it seems a more "guilty until proven innocent" mentality on the forums, quite the contrast to the advice on the website.

foxtrotoscar_2

ljt84 wrote: »

I'd read up on the PPI reclaim on MSE site, that's enough for me. I had an edge case where I went separately for PPI as you saw and commented on in my own thread. As suspected I don't have a case, so I won't pursue it.

I have however put a complaint in on my old credit card which had PPI from my previous bank. If I get anything then great, if not, then no loss other than a 5 minute form filling in.

I'm of the mindset of no harm in trying to claim something, whereas it seems a more "guilty until proven innocent" mentality on the forums, quite the contrast to the advice on the website.

What's your complaint reason for the credit card PPI?

ljt84

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

What's your complaint reason for the credit card PPI?

I was told I needed it to have the credit card. That I needed illness/sickness cover, even though I get 6 months full pay and remainder at half pay from work.
The fact that I never actually spend more than what's in my current account on my credit card and would and do pay it off in full every month.

I only use a credit card to buy things since I had my debit card cloned and bank account emptied. It offers more protection on purchases, and if it ever gets cloned, it's not my cash that the criminal would be spending this time.

foxtrotoscar_2

ljt84 wrote: »

I was told I needed it to have the credit card. That I needed illness/sickness cover, even though I get 6 months full pay and remainder at half pay from work.
The fact that I never actually spend more than what's in my current account on my credit card and would and do pay it off in full every month.

I only use a credit card to buy things since I had my debit card cloned and bank account emptied. It offers more protection on purchases, and if it ever gets cloned, it's not my cash that the criminal would be spending this time.

In that case you didn't actually pay PPI....so you have no valid complaint reason. Zero PPI paid plus 8% interest/annum = Zero payout.

ljt84

foxtrotoscar wrote: »

In that case you didn't actually pay PPI....so you have no valid complaint reason. Zero PPI paid plus 8% interest/annum = Zero payout.

Oh well, I'll see what they say, maybe there might have been an odd month here and there over the last 10 years where I didn't pay everything off. I don't keep my statements that long, but I vaguely remember paying the odd few quid here and there, so even if it's only £10 back or something, it's better in my pocket than theirs, and not bad for 5 minutes of my time.

AnotherJoe

ljt84 wrote: »

I wasn't referencing you in particular.

The comment from "AnotherJoe";
"So, on what basis would you claim you were missold it, since it seems to have been an active choice of yours to have it ???"

was one of many I've read in this sub forum alone.

It made me chuckle when on the main MSE PPI site it states;

"Just having had PPI means you were mis-sold and are likely due a payout"

As has been discussed here many times before, that statement in MSE is wholly misleading and wrong. And it's easy to understand its wrong, because you have to make a claim you were missold, rather than, you had It
If it was as simple as having it = misssold, then you would only have to prove you had it and then that's it, you'd get compo. But that's not the case.

brettcta

AnotherJoe wrote: »

As has been discussed here many times before, that statement in MSE is wholly misleading and wrong. And it's easy to understand its wrong, because you have to make a claim you were missold, rather than, you had It
If it was as simple as having it = misssold, then you would only have to prove you had it and then that's it, you'd get compo. But that's not the case.

Exactly this. If it was a case of you had PPI = a refund, banks would’ve saved the GDP of a small country in staffing costs over the last 10 years by simply refunding everyone and having done with it (something I’m almost certain at this point would’ve been cheaper for some smaller lenders)