PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

oscar52

marshallka wrote: »

Always worth a shot but they were only fined for telephone sales during the period of 2005 to 2007...

It was a telephone sales app - it was a reloan as already had A&L loan - so took out new one, paid off balance of old one and balance was put into my account.

dreamer33

marshallka wrote: »

Slander in what way.. you are only telling the truth aren't you??

I know but its very intimidating making sure you say the right thing. I mean not accusing without the whole factsin front of you.

marshallka

dreamer33 wrote: »

I know but its very intimidating making sure you say the right thing. I mean not accusing without the whole factsin front of you.

Everyone on here accuses as they are stating they have been missold. You are stating you have been missold and that is what you are saying cause you have the facts in front of you...

Kaia's posts are on here if you type Kaia into the search this forum bit or Marluc. I cannot understand why you say there aren't any to be found. They are the only two against Freedom that I know of. Mine was apparently not sold by Freedom.. they said to me... Like I say they are the only two I can recall that have the full story..

Both of there courts letters and everything are on here..

marshallka

oscar52 wrote: »

It was a telephone sales app - it was a reloan as already had A&L loan - so took out new one, paid off balance of old one and balance was put into my account.

I thought they were doing automatic paybacks??

di3004

DiddyDiner

Here is your post copied and pasted over from the other thread to this one.;)

diddydiner vbmenu_register("postmenu_15282803", true);
MoneySaving Newbie


Join Date: Sep 2008
Post Count: 23
Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts


Been Paying Ppi... But On The Credit Agreement "nil"
I PUT A POST ON BEFORE
I GOT THE FACTS NOW AS IN MY LAST POST IT WAS ALL GUESSES.
LOAN OF £2,300 OVER 10 YEARS, APR 29%. 1.44% MTH
AFTER MAKING PAYMENTS OF £63 A MTH ON THE LOAN FOR 5 YEARS
HAD A LETTER FROM FIRST PLUS FINANCE SAYING WE COULD BE ENTITLED TO 25% OF PPI BACK AS THERE WAS NO CLAIMS IN 5 YEARS.
WROTE TO ASK ABOUT GETTING ALL PPI BACK AS WE THINK MISSOLD.
RANG ABOUT TWO WEEKS LATER, THEY HADNT RECIEVED THE LETTER, AND SAID THAT £400 HAD BEEN PAID ON THE PPI IN TOTAL AND WOULD GET BE ENTITLED TO £100.
GUESS WHAT THOUGH !!! ON THE CREDIT AGREEMENT IT STATES MIN PAYMENT £40 MTH, AND PPI NIL…..
WE HAVE PAID ALL THIS MONEY AND STILL OWES THOUSANDS.
I HAVE E MAILED THEM FOR A BREAK DOWN OF PAYMENTS FIRST JUST TO SEE WHAT THAT INVOLVES, THEN WE MAY GET THE ORIGINAL LETTER SENT RECORDED THIS TIME AND SEE.
THING IS WHERE DO WE STAND IF THE PPI SUPPOSE TO BE NIL, AND THEY HAVE SOME HOW TOOK IT ACCORDING TO THE PHONE CALL??????
ALSO ON THE BACK OF THE CREDIT AGREEMENT IT DO MENTION ENFORCABLE WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AS IV BEEN HEARING THIS WORD MENTIONED.

[EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com?subject=Reporting post http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=15282803"][/EMAIL]

oscar52

marshallka wrote: »

I thought they were doing automatic paybacks??

I read that on the news report, but they havnt contacted me about it. Thats why I thought i would write to them.

marshallka

Just a note to all my supporters on here about my Firstplus Unfair rebate complaint.

I understand why the FOS cannot look at my complaint and although they tried with the first one they did not come under jurisdiction until 14th January, 2005 for these types of complaints and that was for the unfair settlement/rebate...

Settlement is a banking complaint and although I resubmitted under Barclays Trading as Firstplus as my settlement was 2003 they were not appointed representatives.

I then resubmitted the unfair rebate (which is apparently to the actual "insurers and not the lender??) under Barclays Trading as FIrstplus and this again is not under juridiction as the unfair rebate was determined by the actual underwriters of the PPI so again is not against either Firstplus or Barclays Trading As Firstplus.

I now feel that the FOS have and are helping me to get some money back for this rebate and although this will not be much I am grateful if I can. They have told me where to put my complaint to and also I feel I may write to Firstplus and point this out that they should have done this as a matter of "complaints handling" and they did not. (my complaint was made in 2008 so they were asked to handle complaints in a certain manner by the FSA and they did not)

Please bear with me on this as FOS are finding out from Firstplus who the insurer actually was (as I have not found the Insurance Policy terms and conditions and also I complained about never having one in 2003 so maybe I did not???) and then writing on my behalf here for a final response. If the worst comes to the worst then I have exhausted all my options and nothing will come of this. I feel a little more confident on this though now as I do know that "Insurers" are under compulsory jurisdiction.

FOS does it best to help us and I have to feel positive on this again... Something is better than nothing...

Thanks to my supporters club....:A I will get there but I think that this complaint is giving us all FACT so although I am having to wait we are all gaining knowledge about the complaints procedure with the FOS. A positive though here..

marshallka

oscar52 wrote: »

I read that on the news report, but they havnt contacted me about it. Thats why I thought i would write to them.

Yeah, I would write as paying everyone back will take time and this could speed things up for you. Let us know what happens and extra good luck for a speedy payback...

dreamer33

marshallka wrote: »

Everyone on here accuses as they are stating they have been missold. You are stating you have been missold and that is what you are saying cause you have the facts in front of you...

Kaia's posts are on here if you type Kaia into the search this forum bit or Marluc. I cannot understand why you say there aren't any to be found. They are the only two against Freedom that I know of. Mine was apparently not sold by Freedom.. they said to me... Like I say they are the only two I can recall that have the full story..

Both of there courts letters and everything are on here..

Just been looking through Kaias posts very interesting this in particular:

And as for the point they constantly love to bring up ...that they sold on a "non-advised basis" there were still standards they had to abide by and didnt.

This is what the FSA say about Non-advised sales...."The customer must, however, still receive sufficient information on the product to enable them to make an informed decision as to whether it meets their own demands and needs".

Any firm providing advice when they don’t have the appropriate permission is acting outside their scope of permission and is therefore NOT meeting our requirements.
If the sale was made without advice, the firm that sold the product should be able to demonstrate through their records that the customer selected the product without any specific recommendation.
So they WILL HAVE TO prove this.

Aso that they said to me "ppi is optional", however no box to tick without ppi

Could not see any court letters?

marshallka

dreamer33 wrote: »

Just been looking through Kaias posts very interesting this in particular:

And as for the point they constantly love to bring up ...that they sold on a "non-advised basis" there were still standards they had to abide by and didnt.

This is what the FSA say about Non-advised sales...."The customer must, however, still receive sufficient information on the product to enable them to make an informed decision as to whether it meets their own demands and needs".

Any firm providing advice when they don’t have the appropriate permission is acting outside their scope of permission and is therefore NOT meeting our requirements.
If the sale was made without advice, the firm that sold the product should be able to demonstrate through their records that the customer selected the product without any specific recommendation.
So they WILL HAVE TO prove this.

Aso that they said to me "ppi is optional", however no box to tick without ppi

Could not see any court letters?

Non advised sales did not start until 2005 anyway...

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/factsheet_sales.pdf
Non-advised sales were first introduced by the FSA in Jan 2005 in the ICOB rules (now ICOBS) Insurance Conduct Of Business. They did not exist prior to then.