PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

I will do hun.;)

This is about Endeavour hun not Nemo lol.:D

I had sent in a mis selling complaint about Endeavour to start with a few months back, but it was sent back to me because they were not covered, and it should have been them of the broker Click I should have complained about and not Endeavour anyway, but due to them dissolving I could not do so, so it'e Endeavour again because of the unfair rebate.;)

I will let you know as soon as I hear.

So which ones are you on about being resubmitted to the FOS then...

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

So which ones are you on about being resubmitted to the FOS then...

lol, sorry to confuse you hun, when I say re-submit, I mean its because its Endeavour again although I made a mistake a few months ago by saying it was mis sold by them, (where in fact it was Click, as I got it wrong), it was not for that reason they sent it back though, it was because they said they were not under jurisdiction.
Then it was suggested on here about unfair rebate settlement, so sent the complaint about Endeavour back to them on the grounds of unfair rebate and not mis selling.;)

"This is the one that the FOS had added on the form 'brand new complaint' not to get confused with first one".

maxdp

Marshallka

Just a point. They sent the letter out the same day as it was being taken over by an adjudicator. I wonder if they sent the letter out as standard response but on looking at it again then sent it to the same adjudicator as you had with Co op. Have you spoken to him again.

Sorry if you posted and I have missed just wondering if the letter was sent out and they have since put to an adjudicator.

I do not understand why they are playing about like this when others have successfully complained.

How do you feel this morning, bet you did not sleep well last night.

marshallka

I have just spoken again to the woman of yesterday about the complaint about unfair rebate and I have stated that I know of 4 others that have complaints of unfair rebates in with the FOS and they are looking into these. I then asked if this was for everyone to have to go to the insurers and she said yes. I then asked her about why I was not told this by Firstplus then and she said "I don't know as I do not work for Firstplus". I then asked her about whether the "insurers" had to be members of the GISC as of the date of the unfair rebate if this was PRIOR to the FSA taking over in 2005 and she did not know. She is calling me back with whoever I have to make my complaint against now. I am totally confused by these. I also asked what about my complaint that was so called "linked" to this one and whether that one was also THROWN OUT too and she did not know. She said "have you asked". I told her I had a letter about it in June to say it was outside jurisdiction and then I resubmitted it again but under BARCLAYS trading as FIrstplus and that was for the LOAN settlement. I told her then I had this letter the other day stating that that complaint was CLOSED and that my ORIGINAL first complaint of June, 2008 was now linked to this new complaint for UNFAIR rebate and then this.

They have totally messed me about and each one does not know what the other is doing here. She said she only had the one complaint with her and that was the unfair rebate one . She also said that she had not said it was closed and then I read the letter back to her in which she stated that it was now closed... SHe then said I have told you where you need to write to so we have helped. I then asked if I wrote to them and got a reply of "NO" would they have to have been under the GISC too at the time of the rebate and like I say she did not know so I could go through all this AGAIN for nothing here. :mad:

Talk about mad, I swear my BP must be through the roof....

maxdp

Hi seen your last post and that answers my query

I do wish they would make it clear this thing about Insurance provider and Insurance/Loan seller. It is most confusing.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I have just spoken again to the woman of yesterday about the complaint about unfair rebate and I have stated that I know of 4 others that have complaints of unfair rebates in with the FOS and they are looking into these. I then asked if this was for everyone to have to go to the insurers and she said yes. I then asked her about why I was not told this by Firstplus then and she said "I don't know as I do not work for Firstplus". I then asked her about whether the "insurers" had to be members of the GISC as of the date of the unfair rebate if this was PRIOR to the FSA taking over in 2005 and she did not know. She is calling me back with whoever I have to make my complaint against now. I am totally confused by these. I also asked what about my complaint that was so called "linked" to this one and whether that one was also THROWN OUT too and she did not know. She said "have you asked". I told her I had a letter about it in June to say it was outside jurisdiction and then I resubmitted it again but under BARCLAYS trading as FIrstplus and that was for the LOAN settlement. I told her then I had this letter the other day stating that that complaint was CLOSED and that my ORIGINAL first complaint of June, 2008 was now linked to this new complaint for UNFAIR rebate and then this.

They have totally messed me about and each one does not know what the other is doing here. She said she only had the one complaint with her and that was the unfair rebate one . She also said that she had not said it was closed and then I read the letter back to her in which she stated that it was now closed... SHe then said I have told you where you need to write to so we have helped. I then asked if I wrote to them and got a reply of "NO" would they have to have been under the GISC too at the time of the rebate and like I say she did not know so I could go through all this AGAIN for nothing here. :mad:

Talk about mad, I swear my BP must be through the roof....

OMG...:eek: , not again !!
Its just not fair is it ?

When she gets back to you with who you must complain to, and if again it goes back to the FOS, you should mention that the FOS had said about going through the insurers, or maybe if they emailed you, is take a copy to add with the form, that is what I did, okay I am expecting mine about the unfair rebate to get thrown back to me now, so I am going to be prepared just in case.
Do you think I should write to reclaim to the insurers now, or wait to see what happens ?
I was just thinking even though the first one was about mis selling, this one is about unfair rebate, and it will be again too with this one if I have to do this again.

Marshallka I really feel for you, I have never known anyone to be messed about like this before, its so confusing, and like you asked, why was this not mentioned by First plus........and she did not know.......:mad:

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

OMG...:eek: , not again !!
Its just not fair is it ?

When she gets back to you with who you must complain to, and if again it goes back to the FOS, you should mention that the FOS had said about going through the insurers, or maybe if they emailed you, is take a copy to add with the form, that is what I did, okay I am expecting mine about the unfair rebate to get thrown back to me now, so I am going to be prepared just in case.
Do you think I should write to reclaim to the insurers now, or wait to see what happens ?
I was just thinking even though the first one was about mis selling, this one is about unfair rebate, and it will be again too with this one if I have to do this again.

Marshallka I really feel for you, I have never known anyone to be messed about like this before, its so confusing, and like you asked, why was this not mentioned by First plus........and she did not know.......:mad:

Just to let EVERYONE know that ALL complaints for unfair rebates HAVE to be directed at the underwriter of the policy and not the lender. That now has been confirmed by the BIG boss of the Ombudsman and all complainants that have sent in complaints for unfair rebates of PPI policies will have to do the same here.

I asked if it was ok to let everyone know this and he said its fine. I also asked if they had to have been members of the GISC if these were pre 2005 sales and he said that MOST insurers came under COMPULSORY jurisidiction since the Ombudsman Scheme and before that the Insurance Ombudsman.

He also told me that complaints against Firstplus could not be submitted against Barclays Trading as FIrstplus as these were completeley different enterties and were NOT allowed.

He gave me an example of NAT WEST and Bank of scotland and that they cannot be looked at as one...

There, I have now spoken to the BIG man here. The manager of all managers and I have told him that we were all given this advice from others one here .

Some people will not know this yet as their complaints are not actually with adjudicators yet but they will have to do exactly the same as me for unfair rebates. I am getting this in writing too.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

OMG...:eek: , not again !!
Its just not fair is it ?

When she gets back to you with who you must complain to, and if again it goes back to the FOS, you should mention that the FOS had said about going through the insurers, or maybe if they emailed you, is take a copy to add with the form, that is what I did, okay I am expecting mine about the unfair rebate to get thrown back to me now, so I am going to be prepared just in case.
Do you think I should write to reclaim to the insurers now, or wait to see what happens ?
I was just thinking even though the first one was about mis selling, this one is about unfair rebate, and it will be again too with this one if I have to do this again.

Marshallka I really feel for you, I have never known anyone to be messed about like this before, its so confusing, and like you asked, why was this not mentioned by First plus........and she did not know.......:mad:

Tiggrae will also have the same response too on her claims and it was tiggrae who told us all.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Just to let EVERYONE know that ALL complaints for unfair rebates HAVE to be directed at the underwriter of the policy and not the lender. That now has been confirmed by the BIG boss of the Ombudsman and all complainants that have sent in complaints for unfair rebates of PPI policies will have to do the same here.

I asked if it was ok to let everyone know this and he said its fine. I also asked if they had to have been members of the GISC if these were pre 2005 sales and he said that MOST insurers came under COMPULSORY jurisidiction since the Ombudsman Scheme and before that the Insurance Ombudsman.

He also told me that complaints against Firstplus could not be submitted against Barclays Trading as FIrstplus as these were completeley different enterties and were NOT allowed.

He gave me an example of NAT WEST and Bank of scotland and that they cannot be looked at as one...

There, I have now spoken to the BIG man here. The manager of all managers and I have told him that we were all given this advice from others one here .

Some people will not know this yet as their complaints are not actually with adjudicators yet but they will have to do exactly the same as me for unfair rebates. I am getting this in writing too.

Thanks hunni, and fingers crossed to you (3rd time lucky) I hope.
Hun you have been messed about terrible here, now if you do not get lucky with the insurers, write to the FOS, explain your situation here and make sure this will be "fast tracked", none of this is your fault, so I would be inclined to make sure that yours especially "yours" is going to get dealt with for as soon as possible on the fast tracking system.

I think now then I should also write to Hamilton then, yet it states their addy as norwich union...... , I can always add a copy of the terms and conditions couldn't I? where it states that Hamilton were the insurers.

I don't think I will wait for a response from the FOS about Endeavour, best to get on with it or time will be wasted again.....:rolleyes:

marshallka

I also read out the unfair term from the insurance policy of Firstplus in that this will NOT be calculated proportionly but rather under use of rule 78 and that is the problem. This is where the FOS can step in. It is that term that is unfair.... and it was for me.

They changed this term in 2003 policies