PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I already have it di.

I gave you the details earlier when you mentioned Zurich and yet the majority was underwritten by LLoyds. I could not understand why you picked the Zurich one when I aksed you as that is the the one that is not uk based and also only underwrote 25% and yet lloyds was the highest at 40%.

oops like I said in my above post, I must get my eyes checked.....:o , I do remember someone mention Zurich but it may not have been with the same loan company, did email my mate not heard yet though.

marshallka

milliemonster wrote: »

Hi guys, I visited CAG forum earlier and they have a template on there to work out how much PPI you should get back, I don't know if you've had a look at it, it's an excel spreadsheet, so I put the details in about my loan and PPI and it came up with a figure of around £5.5k, which fits in with what Marshallka was saying earlier today about the £8k being too high.

I still don't understand though how I could possibly expect anywhere near that amount back when the original PPI was for £4384 and they gave me a rebate of £1054 on early settlement of the loan, is it because of the interest they added on over the whole term?

Yeah, its the interest here. That original £4384 would have cost you about £9K in the end if you had let the loan run to full term. I have seen the thing on CAG before and that gave me a figure sooo high too.

milliemonster

di3004 wrote: »

Hey well done for having a go, your doing better than me when it comes to calculations lol.:T

Yes it would be the interest added like you said.:D .

Aww Di, tbh it wasn't the easiest of spreadsheets to work out and I'm still not sure if it was right but at least it gives me an idea of what I may be entitled to claim back:rolleyes:

di3004

milliemonster wrote: »

Aww Di, tbh it wasn't the easiest of spreadsheets to work out and I'm still not sure if it was right but at least it gives me an idea of what I may be entitled to claim back:rolleyes:

Well you had a go and if it worked out to what Marshallka had said then there we go......:D , I get my kn**Kers in a twist when it comes to working out calculations, even with help of a spreadsheet & calculators......:o lol.

di3004

kav.alison wrote: »

looking around because i was miss sold the PPI i found these guys and they are evening trying to write my debt off because it was misold to me I had a chat with them and never looked back.......cleartoday.com.

Wow, do you mean this has been resolved ?;)
And is this service free hun if you don't mind me asking ?;) cheers.:D

dreamer33

tiggrae wrote: »

Dear Sirs

RE: Mis selling of PPI

In respect to your letter dated ????, please note under the following piece of legislation I hold you equally responsible for your supplier / agent Freedom Finance / Bespoke Finance mis selling of th PPI policy.

Under section 56 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (‘CCA 1974’), the supplier is taken to act on the credit grantor's behalf - as his agent - as well as his own. In effect, this makes the credit grantor responsible for the negotiations as if he had conducted them himself – therefore, under Section 75 of the CCA 1974, we the Claimants name the Credit Grantor as Defendant

I do not know why I have been directed to a company called Bespoke Finance and feel again mislead by yourselves as there is, and was no mention of them at the time I took out my loan.


I have listened to all telephone calls sent to me, during which I actually state I received no documents of Rule 78 or the PPI, nor was anything explained to me about this policy and I certainly would not have taken out a policy for 5 years on a 13 year+ year loan, knowing this was front loaded and I would be paying interest on this for the full term. Also, I was not asked for any medical details which I now realise would invalidate my ability to make a claim. I was mis sold this PPI and it certainly was not sold to me in Utmost Good Faith.

I have also sent a complaint to the FOS regarding the unfair rebate and I would like to point out there are quite a lot of discrepancies I have noted upon receiving my SAR. I have also stated that the whole set up of the loan was very misleading, I applied (proof of which is on the application with the SAR) for a loan of £17,000 with no PPI over 10 years, with repayments of £280 per month (refer to 18th December, 1999) my actual agreement was dated 6th January,2000. My actual agreement was for a loan over 160 months (not the 10 years I requested) and had a PPI amount added. The repayments still being £281 per month, I find no evidence I requested the PPI be added, and even on the application there was some “I/me” questions about receiving information with regard to PPI where are un-ticked / crossed. As I DID NOT ask for this and so did not read any documents, so how can I have had time to read the documents before actually entering into the agreement? The tick on the box for PPI on the application is not ours and is completely different and completed by whoever filled in the words “mortgage business”.

We were not given any documentation at this time and we have not filled out the details in the application to say we have. I remember querying this at the time of the loan and was told it a condition. I/we left the box for the PPI on the application blank, also it stated PPI for “one” or “both” (note no option for “not required”) and someone has ticked the box for both.
I policy was added on by either yourselves “Firstplus” or your Agent “Freedom Finance” and I therefore, hold you fully responsibly for the actions of your Agent. I will be commenced proceedings in the County Court should the FOS be unable to assist, as I feel VERY strongly about this matter.

I would also note I complained numerous times during the loan long before anyone had realised PPI’s had been mis sold to the extent they have. We have suffered dearly since this loan and are still finding it difficult to get on top of our finances. We did not know about the early settlement Rule 78 as no documents were sent as with the ppi.

I trust this complaint will be dealt with by whoever has the authority to do so and we can come to a full and final conclusion. You allowed Freedom Finance to act as your Agents in this deal and are therefore, fully responsible for their actions equally. (Section 75 CCA 1974) The PPI element of the loan agreement is typed in by yourselves’ and was not filled in by me. We did not want this adding to our loan but it was sold alongside a Firstplus loan, and therefore we were Misrepresented about the whole loan facility. Also, the manner in which it was added onto the agreement is not correct, and I have asked the FOS investigate this as well. I would like a fair rebate on the loan and the PPI refunded.

To date, I feel you have failed to investigate my complaint in a proper manner. You did not even know an address for Bespoke Finance, a company which claim you allow to sell your loans and had to forward this to me in writing. I feel totally mislead and misrepresented.

I wanted a loan for £17,000 over 10 years with repayments of £280 and that is the position I will be asking to be put back into. (THAT IS WHAT I APPLIED FOR). This would mean a refund of all PPI paid and then a fair settlement as if I had taken my loan out as agreed and made the 38 repayments on a loan of £17,000 over 10 years. Please note I have sent a complaint in to the FOS about you using the rule 78 to calculate my settlement as in the “OFT Non Status Lending document of 1997”, use of the rule 78 in the non status lending market (as we were as we could not of got this loan otherwise on the high street and Firstplus were sub-prime lenders – if we could have got this loan elsewhere, we would not have secured it against our home.

Firstplus advertised at the time they would loan up to 125% of the value of your property, this I believe is deemed unfair and oppressive as it produces a settlement figure which is excessive in relation to the amount borrowed and repayments made. I think this to be an Unfair Contract Term under the Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and again have advised the FOS of this. My claim uses the rule 78 and I would like to say that I still have to have guidance on this from the FOS as to whether you were fair to use it. If this is upheld by the FOS, then my claim will result in a new calculation amount using a fairer method of settlement.


Unless you can provide documented evidence of my asking for this PPI for the loan be taken out over 160 months and not the 10 years, this matter will be dealt with by either the FOS or the courts. I believe the whole way it which this matter has been dealt with was unprofessional, I applied for something completely different and in a matter of 14 working days I received a document for signing which had the same repayments but over 160 months instead of 120 months. This was totally misleading, we took this loan out in good faith and were misrepresented on this matter.


Upon applying for the facility the seller (whoever it may be) did make the following misrepresentations to us regarding details of the loan facility, thereby inducing us as reasonable people into a contract for the purchase of separate ppi. Under the misrepresentation act 1967 this constitutes negligent misrepresentation.

We neither requested nor wanted this policy and it was included automatically on the agreement. Nothing was explained about this policy at the time and had it been then we would of not taken this out as it did not meet our needs.

Yours faithfully

This letter is brilliant would you mind if I used it?

di3004

dreamer33 wrote: »

This letter is brilliant would you mind if I used it?

I am sure they won't mind.;)

Just add your own personal info as you know and your well away.:D

Good luck !

pinknico

Sorry to hear your FOS news today Marshallka. Was this the rebate of insurance when you settled the loan or cancelled the insurance?

di3004

pinknico wrote: »

Sorry to hear your FOS news today Marshallka. Was this the rebate of insurance when you settled the loan or cancelled the insurance?

Hi there Pinknico.

Think Marshallka has signed off for a little while, and I expect she will be back soon.
This is unfortunately about the "unfair rebate", and I feel they have not dealt with this in a proper manner going by what Marshallka have said today.... , its just so not fair what they have done here, as you know Marshallka had re-submitted this and was then told they were looking at it, then suddenly they cannot......:mad: .

Yet what seems wrong is the fact that others in the same situation as Marshallka stated had their's passed over and no comebacks, unlike her own again which makes her feel discriminated.

I would feel that way too, so I do hope something is done about this, I feel for her and she has worked so hard with this complaint, I am losing faith in these myself now too !

marshallka

pinknico wrote: »

Sorry to hear your FOS news today Marshallka. Was this the rebate of insurance when you settled the loan or cancelled the insurance?

Yeah it was when i settled the loan. Thanks for the kind comment pinknico...