PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

tiggrae

bunnysgirl wrote: »

Hi i am a new comer and i wonder if anyone can help me. I had an overdraft with lloyds tsb and had insurance cover on it with cardiff pinnacle, this was done through the bank.
Last year my husband was terminally ill and i was off work with stress. I rang cardiff pinnacle and explained my situation and was told that i could not claim with stress unless i was under a psychaitrist. I cancelled the insurance and i want to know if i have grounds to claim the money back.

hi there - presumably you didn't have the stress related illness prior to your taking out the insurance and that they were referring to a contract term within the PPI which states you have to be under the care of a psychaitrist to claim for stress related illness - this then I don't believe is mis selling - more that you were unwilling to comply with the contract term regarding seeing a psychaitrist ?

di3004

tiggrae wrote: »

hi there - presumably you didn't have the stress related illness prior to your taking out the insurance and that they were referring to a contract term within the PPI which states you have to be under the care of a psychaitrist to claim for stress related illness - this then I don't believe is mis selling - more that you were unwilling to comply with the contract term regarding seeing a psychaitrist ?

Tiggrae thanks for confirming this, as we have the same cover hubby is sick from work due to stress/depressive episode and this needs addressing to the company that my hubby did not have this at the time of taking this out, thanks.;)

tiggrae

marshallka wrote: »

I presume she means that whole loan and with the PPI included. The contract of the loan??

If the PPI was sold wrong then the PPI is on the loan contract and this in turn makes the whole contract unfair. I presume this but do not know. I think she perhaps meant unfair terms in contracts.

it's just that that sentance doesn't make sense as it doesn't actually refer to any particular contract or specific contract term

mlucyminx

thanks for your help with the barclays thing. we live and learn. will see what I can do by contacting fos.

marshallka

tiggrae wrote: »

it's just that that sentance doesn't make sense as it doesn't actually refer to any particular contract or specific contract term

She has sent it now today and singlep looked at it last night and ok'd it too. Just have to wait and see!!

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Tiggrae thanks for confirming this, as we have the same cover hubby is sick from work due to stress/depressive episode and this needs addressing to the company that my hubby did not have this at the time of taking this out, thanks.;)

It does not matter if he had it before or not on most policies. They do not see stress as an "illness" unless you are actually under a psychiatrist and receiving treatment. Its the same for any policy. Stress is often seen as self inflicted. If you are seeing an actual psychiatrist then that is different. It does not matter if you are actually taking meds for it either. Its only about receiving treatment from the psychiatrist.

di3004

Received a return email from FSCS.

They state they have only just started their investigations and they are not aware who is or was linked to the company (Twopart), and will get in touch if they require further information.

Marahallka that I think answers that question that - that other company listed is nothing to do with them and they were earlier lists as you know.;)

At least the investigations have began lol, okay a long wait but its a start.:D

tiggrae

marshallka wrote: »

It does not matter if he had it before or not on most policies. They do not see stress as an "illness" unless you are actually under a psychiatrist and receiving treatment. Its the same for any policy. Stress is often seen as self inflicted. If you are seeing an actual psychiatrist then that is different. It does not matter if you are actually taking meds for it either. Its only about receiving treatment from the psychiatrist.

I agree, if this condition was after taking out the insurance then it cannot be mis selling and I really not sure it can be classed as an unfair contract term either

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

It does not matter if he had it before or not on most policies. They do not see stress as an "illness" unless you are actually under a psychiatrist and receiving treatment. Its the same for any policy. Stress is often seen as self inflicted. If you are seeing an actual psychiatrist then that is different. It does not matter if you are actually taking meds for it either. Its only about receiving treatment from the psychiatrist.

Yes your right, I have been trying to find our policy, put it too safe again...:rolleyes: , but yep that is right what you said.;) Thx.

marshallka

kazc wrote: »

okay, thanks very much. I'm going to ring them when i get back from the school run and see what they say.

Kazc, you need to write to them for misselling and also send it recorded delivery too. You have to then give them 8 weeks for a full and final response.

There is a template letter on here. Try to make it your own and add delete what is necessary to your claim. You had no rebate as well and that alone is unfair. Go for the misselling though.