PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

tiggrae

marshallka wrote: »

I have read numerous threads on here about people complaining to the FOS about Firstplus (like myself but mine had yet to be answered) and the FOS saying they were not regulated by anyone at the time of selling but i note that firstplus was owned by the Barclays Group. Surely Barclays were regulated by someone and if they own them then surely the FOS CAN help. Any advice here of the exact time barclays owned them from.

http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/business-in-wales/business-news/tm_headline=barclays-8216-set-to-sell-firstplus-8217&method=full&objectid=19841052&siteid=50082-name_page.html

Barclays were regulated by the FSA on 01.12.2001

m.colak

sarahc5388 wrote: »

bloody ell - it's gone up!! just to clarify - how much should I be asking for??:T

Ok you've overpaid by £2103.02 even allowing for the 22% commision charge which they supposedly allowed to take you still could in theory claim back £1640.54 as a disproportional rebate.

If you are claiming back the PPI then you could in theory claim back £1444.50 as this is the amount you should never have paid in the first place if mis sold. Therefore if you put in a claim for both you are looking at £3084.84. Hope this helps.

m.colak

mamshelly wrote: »

Hi there, I am reposting this message - please can someone help me? I would be really grateful for any advice please.

I was wondering if anyone could help please? Couple of things ...
We have wrote to our lender Paragon Personal Finance asking for a rebate of our PPI that we felt was missold to us in 2004 and they are trying to fob us off. They have said that I will have to go back to the original lender which was EasyLoans.co.uk as they handled all the paperwork relating to our application and only forwarded to Paragon the fully packaged documents after we had signed the Credit Agreement. Please could anyone help with this and let me know if I should go back to them or should I pursue Paragon as we have the loan with them?
Also, our credit agreement became an Unregulated Credit Agreement because of the added PPI as the original loan amount was for £25,000 and they added on £7,250 for the PPI. We have had problems trying to find out what our rights are with this sort of agreement - please could anyone help?

I would really really appreciate some advice please.

Thank you

P.S. There are other problems that we have had with this loan but there is too much to go into here, but basically they are offering us a goodwill gesture by reducing our interest rate from 11.392% to 10.892% which doesn't even make a difference!

Start off by sending a SAR to easyloan from there you should have all the documentation to prove either that you didn't need PPI or was mis sold from the first place. Once you have all that information i'm sure we can point you to the relevant information depending on which way you wish to cite your case.

marshallka

tiggrae wrote: »

Barclays were regulated by the FSA on 01.12.2001

My loan and ppi were 4th Jan 2000 so not in date for me. I did settle in april, 2003 so does that help. My complaint over the rule of 78 and ppi (maybe) is with the FOS now. I am waiting for their reply.

Kaia_2

tiggrae wrote: »

This is the rules for CPR 18 - I think the solicitors will be referring to is 1.2 - ie has to be concise, but there is nothing I've seen about not being allowed under the small claims track, I've had letters back where it says the information requested is disproportionate - however, if a defendent has put a claimant to 'a strict burden of proof' then I would argue information regarding good practice procedures over the selling of insurance are part of this (ie if they can't prove good practice procedures how can they say an insurance was sold properly ?)

PRELIMINARY REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR CLARIFICATION
1.1 Before making an application to the court for an order under Part 18, the party seeking clarification or information (the first party) should first serve on the party from whom it is sought (the second party) a written request for that clarification or information (a Request) stating a date by which the response to the Request should be served. The date must allow the second party a reasonable time to respond.
1.2 A Request should be concise and strictly confined to matters which are reasonably necessary and proportionate to enable the first party to prepare his own case or to understand the case he has to meet.
1.3 Requests must be made as far as possible in a single comprehensive document and not piecemeal.
1.4 A Request may be made by letter if the text of the Request is brief and the reply is likely to be brief; otherwise the Request should be made in a separate document.
1.5 If a Request is made in a letter, the letter should, in order to distinguish it from any other that might routinely be written in the course of a case,
(1)state that it contains a Request made under Part 18, and
(2)deal with no matters other than the Request.
1.6 (1)A Request (whether made by letter or in a separate document) must –
(a)be headed with the name of the court and the title and number of the claim,
(b)in its heading state that it is a Request made under Part 18, identify the first party and the second party and state the date on which it is made,
(c)set out in a separate numbered paragraph each request for information or clarification,
(d)where a Request relates to a document, identify that document and (if relevant) the paragraph or words to which it relates,
(e)state the date by which the first party expects a response to the Request.
(2)(a)A Request which is not in the form of a letter may, if convenient, be prepared in such a way that the response may be given on the same document.
(b)To do this the numbered paragraphs of the Request should appear on the left hand half of each sheet so that the paragraphs of the response may then appear on the right.
(c)Where a Request is prepared in this form an extra copy should be served for the use of the second party.
1.7 Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 3.1 to 3.3 of the Practice Direction to Part 6, a request should be served by e-mail if reasonably practicable.

Thanks for that...
Should I send this request now at this stage or should I wait for the defence docs first.
What is considered a "reasonable" time to allow for a response.
Would you recommend sending this request by letter or e-mail?

sarahc5388

m.colak wrote: »

Ok you've overpaid by £2103.02 even allowing for the 22% commision charge which they supposedly allowed to take you still could in theory claim back £1640.54 as a disproportional rebate.

If you are claiming back the PPI then you could in theory claim back £1444.50 as this is the amount you should never have paid in the first place if mis sold. Therefore if you put in a claim for both you are looking at £3084.84. Hope this helps.

My god! right, i've sent a letter off last week about the PPI, what about the overpayment, is it best to go into a branch or phone or write another letter, has this happened to anyone else? and did they have any success, does anyone one know if this is even legal, and will it make my case for claiming back the PPI any stronger? Gone through all the figures and i could see where you got them from!!!! (apart from the interest bit) you're a star!:A:A:A:A:A:A

marshallka

tiggrae wrote: »

Barclays were regulated by the FSA on 01.12.2001

does that mean then my ppi (IF firstplus sold it to me in january 2000 - they say freedom finance actually sold it but have yet to actually prove it) was totally unregulated.:mad:

alleybabes

tiggrae wrote: »

whenever an application is made, both parties have to copy the other party into the application (this is called serving notice) as well as sending it to the court

you can tell its all new to me lol! thanks tiggrae i will let you know how i get on

alleybabes

Laini wrote: »

we have been with the FOS since the new year and got the same reply as you have which means you are in the queue.
it has taken until may 2008 to be assigned an adjudicator( we are still awaiting their decision )you will get a letter to say you are being assigned an adjudicator and then the adjudicator will write to you saying they are looking into your cases. I have been told you do receive a long document stating all the information on how they come to their decision and if successful they then advise the company on how much to pay and in a time frame to do it.
I know someone had to wait nearly a year to receive the money.
so it might be christmas before it is complete for us.
the FOS received nearly 2000 PPI complaints in total last year they are now dealing with 2000 per MONTH so be prepared to wait.-sorry
I will update when I get any news

Laini xxx

Hi Laini i am still waitin for fos not as long you they have written back to me saying they are waiting for an adjudicator for my case,i will let you know how i get on and im sure you will too,good luck

alleybabes

tiggrae wrote: »

whenever an application is made, both parties have to copy the other party into the application (this is called serving notice) as well as sending it to the court

Do you know what will happen next? they have applied for the judgement by default to be put aside will i be informed if they are refused or if they allow it? sorry to keep going on but really worried as i dont want to go to court