Advice needed

Teaboys

I was mis sold ppi by nat west in the early 80's, I was made redundant and the ppi as sold to me would've paid the loan. At the time the nat west refused to pay the loan and arrears built up and werenever paid. I eventually proved that I had ppi and they agreed it was mis sold and awarded me over 4k in 2021. I never received a penny as they took it off the arrears, I argued there wouldn't have been arrears if they had used the ppi correctly I was sold but they refused and shockingly the ombudsman agreed with them, is this correct I need advise please.
Roy worboyes 

MorningcoffeeIV

Yes, it's correct. They've offset it against the outstanding debt 

dunstonh

I was mis sold ppi by nat west in the early 80's,

Wow.  That is rare.  Most of the banks didnt start offering PPI until 1988 and the real misselling didnt start until the early 90s.

 I eventually proved that I had ppi and they agreed it was mis sold and awarded me over 4k in 2021. I never received a penny as they took it off the arrears, I argued there wouldn't have been arrears if they had used the ppi correctly I was sold but they refused and shockingly the ombudsman agreed with them, is this correct I need advise please.

The rules allow for redress from PPI to get against arrears, defaults and amounts previously written off or bankruptcy.  So, yes, it is correct.   What you often find is that the banks will accept the complaint if they dont need to pay it back to you.

That is quite logical and correct as you failed to repay the debt.  So, effectively you didnt pay the PPI.  So, any refund goes against that debt that you didnt pay.