PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I think you have been missold the lot to tell you the truth Di. How can they have "child benefits" as YOUR income. Its so wrong how they do this. No mortgage or other would accept child benefit as income. Then to offer PPI on this too is madness.

Thanks hun
Wonder if the adjudicator will actually pick up on this or should I mention this ?
Maybe wait to see what they have to come back with first then if they want more info I can always bring this up couldn't I?

So if this is the case would the adjudicator look at ALL the credit being mis sold or just the ppi, I'm really not sure on this now? Cheers.;)

I'm gonna dig out my agreement now, I do know they added the cross of where I had to sign.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Thanks hun
Wonder if the adjudicator will actually pick up on this or should I mention this ?
Maybe wait to see what they have to come back with first then if they want more info I can always bring this up couldn't I?

So if this is the case would the adjudicator look at ALL the credit being mis sold or just the ppi, I'm really not sure on this now? Cheers.;)

I'm gonna dig out my agreement now, I do know they added the cross of where I had to sign.

Di, I don't know whether you should mention at all. Perhaps in a phone call but you don't want to confuse the issue here. I think they are different complaints. I don't know but how can PPI be offered against "child benefit" . How can a credit be offered against child benefit too.

marshallka

Just had a letter from the Ombudsman about Firstplus but don't really understand it..

It says

Further to my previous correspondence to you I have been informed by the firm that you already have complaints regarding this issue with us. I am therefore closing this complaint. I have checked our system and can see that there are two other complaints logged for the same complaint. I have linked the two other complaints so that only one investigation is carried out by us the reference being **** and ****. I have also noted that you have made an appeal on the case where a view has already been made this will be dealt with by one of my collegues....

The reference numbers that they have linked together are that of the one that went to an adjudicator and also the unfair rebate one too.

I was told in writing that the complaint that went to an adjudicator in June was done and dusted and then sent it in again under Barclays t/a firstplus and quoted in it that there was another complaint that had been closed as outside jurisdiction. I sent another in for unfair settlement and that has been closed too according to this letter. I have not had anything in writing as to reopening the other complaint and also the other complaint actually got before an adjudicator and then got thrown back. Now they are making me wait again for this. I cannot understand what they are playing at.

This letter of today was from an assistant team manager

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Di, I don't know whether you should mention at all. Perhaps in a phone call but you don't want to confuse the issue here. I think they are different complaints. I don't know but how can PPI be offered against "child benefit" . How can a credit be offered against child benefit too.

I was thinking the same, so will leave that one lie for now.

Found my agreement, this is what it says:

I was then a "tenant" that was ticked.

Married

Old address

Homemaker - ticked.

They had down net pay down as £200 a month, they must have rounded this off, because all I was receiving then was the children's benefits which was not £200 a month back in Jan 2001, it was one hundred and something.


It then shows their own ticks which they can easily say it were mine and a cross where to sign.

They have not got me down as an additional card holder.
They have me down as the "Principle card holder"

I did mention on the FOS complaint form it was the childrens benefits.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Just had a letter from the Ombudsman about Firstplus but don't really understand it..

It says

Further to my previous correspondence to you I have been informed by the firm that you already have complaints regarding this issue with us. I am therefore closing this complaint. I have checked our system and can see that there are two other complaints logged for the same complaint. I have linked the two other complaints so that only one investigation is carried out by us the reference being **** and ****. I have also noted that you have made an appeal on the case where a view has already been made this will be dealt with by one of my collegues....

The reference numbers that they have linked together are that of the one that went to an adjudicator and also the unfair rebate one too.

I was told in writing that the complaint that went to an adjudicator in June was done and dusted and then sent it in again under Barclays t/a firstplus and quoted in it that there was another complaint that had been closed as outside jurisdiction. I sent another in for unfair settlement and that has been closed too according to this letter. I have not had anything in writing as to reopening the other complaint and also the other complaint actually got before an adjudicator and then got thrown back. Now they are making me wait again for this. I cannot understand what they are playing at.

This letter of today was from an assistant team manager

So this one is about the "unfair rebate" then ? am I correct ?

I would ring them and tell them you are confused by this because you are being told different things, maybe they could clarify this for you.

So this one is the latest one sent in then is it ?
And how long ago now did you sent the last complaint off ?

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

So this one is about the "unfair rebate" then ? am I correct ?

I would ring them and tell them you are confused by this because you are being told different things, maybe they could clarify this for you.

So this one is the latest one sent in then is it ?
And how long ago now did you sent the last complaint off ?

They are saying that they have linked the one that went to an adjudicator in early June and the one for unfair rebate too (sent in recently). The one that went to an adjudicator in June looks to have been reopened or something as they say these two complaints have now been "linked" and are being looked into as one complaint. What pees me off is the fact that it near on 5 months later and still its back in the queue and yet it was with an adjudicator in early June.:mad: Then I resubmitted this again under unfair rebate but they have now linked the two and closed the new unfair settlement one off but not fast tracked it or even taken into account the fact the first complaint in this link was already with someone.

I have now been waiting for near on 5 months and when it got to the adjudicator in early June it was fast tracked and yet they won't do this this time.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

They are saying that they have linked the one that went to an adjudicator in early June and they one for unfair rebate too. The one that went to an adjudicator in June looks to have been reopened or something as they say these two complaints have now been "linked" and are being looked into as one complaint. What pees me off is the fact that it near on 5 months later and still its back in the queue and yet it was with an adjudicator in early June.:mad: Then I resubmitted this again under unfair rebate but they have now linked the two and closed the new unfair settlement one off but not fast tracked it or even taken into account the fact the first complaint in this link was already with someone.

I have now been waiting for near on 5 months and when it got to the adjudicator in early June it was fast tracked and yet they won't do this this time.

That is just not fair to go back in the queue !!!:mad:
5 months is long enough already !!

They have confused all this for you !

So it seems they will fast track on of the complaints but not them all, yet you still have personal problems etc, which really should include them all.
I have actually heard that they will consider looking at no matter how many complaints you have, that they can still have them all fast tracked, I would see if they can do this for you still.

The other reason why I asked how long has your latest one been in with them is because I was wondering if it was around the same time as my Endeavour one I sent back to them a few weeks back ?

Because if these were in the same pile sort of thing, I am wondering if I will hear if this is going to be passed on them thrown back at me again.

marshallka

Just got through to them and my case has been assigned an adjudicator at long last and it is the same one as the co-op complaints. Just spoken to him and he only had the file half an hour ago so leave him to it for a while now.

sallyh81

Morning all,

I'm not sure whether this is the right place to post this, as still getting used to this forum business, but would appreciate your comments.

Basically, I bought a car in September last year through Carcraft, who arranged finance for me. They asked whether I wanted optional PPI, and I agreed after hearing the guy's patter about it all.

Since then, I have been making monthly payments to my finance company for my car, and also paying £56 a month to Creation Consumer Finance for my PPI.

Anyway, upon looking at my documents today, it appears that I am in fact paying towards optional PPI in with my loan payments (it's done as a separate loan to my HP, but I make 1 payment to the company to cover both), so it turns out I've been paying £54 a month to the finance company and £56 a month to Creation for the same thing!

Obviously, I would not knowingly have signed up for this. Have I been mis-sold PPI? What are my chances of rectifying this, and how would I go about it?

Any advice would be greatly received as I'm currently on maternity leave and the extra £56 a month would come in very handy.

Thanks

di3004

Looking back at the Final response given by Lloyds TSB, here is some things they added, this is so much like everyone elses who have the same problem with them as me:

the policy document made it clear that the cover was optional and asked you to ensure that it met with your requirements. In addition, it explained that you could cancel the policy during the 30 day cooling period without having to pay any premiums.
Alternatively you could cancel anytime afterwards, provided that you gave us 14 days notice.

Having reviewed you details, I have found no evidence to show that we led you to believe you could only have the credit card account if you also took out the Payment Protection Cover.

I should explain that, with regards to being a "Homemaker/unemployed person, you were still eligible for the cover under the Hospitalisation and the Life sections of the policy and could also benefit from the Positive job Solutions.
If your cicumstances changed and you started employment, then you "may" have become eligible for the Unemployment and sickness and Accident sections, as well as the life cover and the Positive Job Solutions.

Full details of the policy's cover and exclusions are given in the policy document, which we would have sent to you when you you took out the Payment protection cover.
...................................................................................................