Ombudsman & ppi

In a nutshell:
PPI found on joint mortgage (myself and my wife).
Mortgage: 1987-2005; paid off early.
Wife died 2015: bank notified by death certificate. Under Rules of Probate it was not required on the estate at that time (joint tenancy etc).
Bank informed me that PPI was in my name only, not wife (Wife did not work when mortgage obtained).
Bank claiming not to pay PPI  but cannot provide any evidence of any type forwarded to support this. We did not authorise PPI and did not know it was on the mortgage until found in late 2019. All correspondence from bank directed at me and questions concerning past relate directly to me, not my late wife. I sent all details sent to Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman Office insists on Probate to, "--confirm I am legally entitled to bring complaint to them on my late wife's behalf." Note Bank have already given them my personal details of income, occupation in 1987 (Note wife unemployed).
What is the situation? Can they asked the something that was not required 5 years ago on insurance payments added to mortgage payments which were never authorised paid out of a joint account?.

Comments

  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 115,681
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    Bank claiming not to pay PPI  but cannot provide any evidence of any type forwarded to support this.

    That is a bit like asking for proof ghosts do not exist rather.

    We did not authorise PPI and did not know it was on the mortgage until found in late 2019.

    It would have appeared on every statement and a signature would have been required back then.  So, that does not seem likely. More likely is that you forgot.

    What is the situation? Can they asked the something that was not required 5 years ago on insurance payments added to mortgage payments which were never authorised paid out of a joint account?

    It seems a bit harsh if you were the sole beneficiary of the estate.  If you were not, then it is reasonable.  

    Technically they are correct but we have seen plenty of times that some banks don't enforce it unless the complaint is successful. 

    It also seems a lot of work when we know that most MPPI complaints fail and the FOS are only upholding around 1 in 4 PPI complaints overall (even less for MPPI but i don't have a current figure).

    However, none of this gets past the problem that there is no evidence that PPI was paid.  If you have no evidence of payment and the bank has no evidence of payment then there is nothing to refund even if they uphold the complaint.   You haven't given your complaint reasons (not knowing you had it rarely succeeds on that point.  So, we assume you have something else as a complaint reason?)


    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • -taff
    -taff Posts: 14,359
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Forumite
    SO are you saying that you had no mortgage protection in place for 18 years and didn't think you needed any?
    Shampoo? No thanks, I'll have real poo...
  • Thank you for your replies
    However my problem at this stage is simply that the Financial Ombudsman (FO) will not proceed without the grant of Probate on the estate but which was never required under the Rules of Probate.
    To clarify the background:
    1. The mortgage provider (MP) provided a written acknowledgement to me that PPI was applied to the mortgage payment.
    2. NONE of our mortgage statements or final payment over 21 years disclose or refer to PPI payments. I therefore have no record or evidence of these payments; they were hidden .Clearly one can't have knowledge of something that was never disclosed.
     PPI was only discovered in late 2019
    3. If the MP had any record of my acceptance namely a signature then providing it would make any claim disappear. It has never been provided or any other objective evidence.
    4. I am the sole beneficiary of the whole estate. No probate was required. There were no other beneficiaries.
    5. 3 PPI claims were found by a specialist company. 2 have paid out (£8600), the 3rd is the MP. I did not know any PPI existed until found in late 2019, all were hidden.
     6. PPI was never discussed by the MP's agent. The value of the property provided by the MP in March 1987 was over 5x that of the mortgage; plenty of equity to buy smaller property if necessary.
    Thus my problem is currently with the FO requiring Probate on an estate where it was not required 5 years ago and not at this stage with the MP. Any ideas?
     Thank you
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 26,612
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Forumite
    edited 9 April 2020 at 11:31AM
    GrampyG said:
     PPI was only discovered in late 2019 PPI claims were found by a specialist company. 
    Seems pretty cut and dried that the FOS will only proceed with an adjudication if you provide the requested documentation.

    In the circumstances you describe any such adjudication is very unlikely to go in your favour anyhow for the reasons others have already detailed. 

    This is not worth pursuing any further in my opinion. 
  • Hi
    Thank you for your reply. Much appreciated.
    The 2 PPI payouts were paid as a result of not being told it had been applied: this is the same as the mortgage.
    I do wonder, however, what the FOS would have said if I had sold the property? I simply can't provide documents that were never required.
    Thank you for your opinion - I think you're right but it will be interesting in these times of lockdown.
    Thank you
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 26,612
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Forumite
    edited 9 April 2020 at 12:14PM
    GrampyG said:
    The 2 PPI payouts were paid as a result of not being told it had been applied
    Although you may well have complained that the PPI was added without your knowledge, your complaint will not have been upheld on that basis I'm afraid, as there will have been  no evidence to substantiate that. 

     Since Banks only detail why complaints are being rejected, you'll never know why your other PPI was refunded and  the result of your other complaints is irrelevant to this  case anyhow. 

    As to the journey of this complaint during the lockdown, I'd say it has no bearing at all other than increased waiting time..
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 115,681
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    1. The mortgage provider (MP) provided a written acknowledgement to me that PPI was applied to the mortgage payment.

    But did you actually pay it?  Plenty of times accounts were set up with the provision of MPPI being possible but not proceeded with in the end.

    2. NONE of our mortgage statements or final payment over 21 years disclose or refer to PPI payments. I therefore have no record or evidence of these payments; they were hidden .Clearly one can't have knowledge of something that was never disclosed.
     PPI was only discovered in late 2019

    PPI was never hidden.  If you were paying it, it would either appear as a transaction on your current account (that accounts for most MPPI) or as a transaction on the mortgage statement (only tended to happen with 80s and early 90s building societies).   If you paid your home insurance via the mortgage, you would see the same with that.

    3. If the MP had any record of my acceptance namely a signature then providing it would make any claim disappear. It has never been provided or any other objective evidence.

    It almost certainly would no longer exist due to the length of time.  However, signature free applications didnt exist when you say this was taken out.

    5. 3 PPI claims were found by a specialist company. 2 have paid out (£8600), the 3rd is the MP. I did not know any PPI existed until found in late 2019, all were hidden.

    Claims companies are not specialists.    None of those would have been hidden.  It is not possible.    Loan agreements show the amounts on the agreements and the transactions show on the statements.

    6. PPI was never discussed by the MP's agent. The value of the property provided by the MP in March 1987 was over 5x that of the mortgage; plenty of equity to buy smaller property if necessary.

    That is not really relevant to the sale of PPI though.  However, when you say agent, was this an employee of the bank/building society or a third party (such as estate agent, financial adviser, mortgage broker etc).    Most mortgages are arranged by agents rather than bank employees.  In those cases, the agent is the one that sets up the insurance.  Not the bank. The bank doesn't provide the insurance in that case and is not liable for the complaint.   They may know if insurances exist but not what was paid.



    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 341.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 233.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 606K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.5K Life & Family
  • 246.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards