PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Di, no-one has taken these over but the point is that to claim the cashback part of the Firstplus policy you had to write to this company within 30 days of the end of the 5 years to get the cashback and they did not exist.

They are not the insurers, that is LLoyds and that is who my complaint that the FOS are writing about goes to not the administrators.

Oh golly......:eek:

marshallka

This is my claim to the insurers about my unfair rebate under the unfair terms in consumer contracts regulations 1999

Termination of Cover and Benefit
If you cancel your policy before its normal expiry date you will receive a rebate of your premium provided you have not made a successful claim. Your insurers will not calculate your rebate proportionally, rather under the Rule of 78 set out in the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This was an unfair term in the contract.
Under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 this term caused a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer.
Also this was not written in plain intelligible language and therefore is open to challenge as this put us at a disadvantage and we were not clear about the meaning of this term.
This term meant that our insurance cost us £9K for 39 months and also it was front loaded (front loaded is where rule 78 is used on the policy itself and only a slight proportion of it)

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Wow, unlawful ey... I know two of my agreements from the co-op are not signed on the front and one copy they sent me first of one of them actually had the words of "x me" on the front and then another completely blank.. Also when they sent more copies with the SAR they have whitted out their signature bit too. I noted that with the FOS but tiggrae told me to not complicate matters and said that if this was a PPI complaint then the other about the agreement would be a banking complaint and I would confuse the FOS. May get another complaint in now about this if it is unlawful..;)

And I agree with you.
This is unlawful go for it Marshallka.;)

pinknico

And you have had to go to the FOS for blatant mis selling, How did Lloyds defend this?!

pinknico

di3004 wrote: »

And I agree with you.
This is unlawful go for it Marshallka.;)

What did they do to Bathgatebuyer that was unlawful?

marshallka

pinknico wrote: »

What did they do to Bathgatebuyer that was unlawful?

The prescribed terms of a credit agreement...

bathgatebuyer

marshallka wrote: »

Wow, unlawful ey... I know two of my agreements from the co-op are not signed on the front and one copy they sent me first of one of them actually had the words of "x me" on the front and then another completely blank.. Also when they sent more copies with the SAR they have whitted out their signature bit too. I noted that with the FOS but tiggrae told me to not complicate matters and said that if this was a PPI complaint then the other about the agreement would be a banking complaint and I would confuse the FOS. May get another complaint in now about this if it is unlawful..;)

At first the FOS said they would not investigate as it was not their job to 'police bank or tell them how to manage their administrative procedures' but the OFT response said that the banks should not be seeking to enforce an agreement that it lacking in the prescribed terms as to do so would be unlawful. The appropriate body to take it to would be the FOS.

Things have got somewhat confused and I'm wondering whether the FOS can cope with more than one issue in a single complaint!!!

I've also written to the OFT to ask them for clarification as to the refusal of Sainsburys to put the account on hold and continue to add interest and charges while there is a clear dispute in place. They were very quick with their response the last time and I'm hoping they send such a clear reponse this time which will help reinforce this point too.

di3004

pinknico wrote: »

And you have had to go to the FOS for blatant mis selling, How did Lloyds defend this?!

Sorry Pinknico, is this for me to answer ? lol....:o

If so mine is actually with the adjudicator right now and being dealt with, Lloyds have not upheld the case and the adjudicator has raised some issues, he had told me by email last week, he said they had 2 weeks to get back so may hear something soon.

I have the loan ppi to deal with yet, am starting the reclaim letters now.

Apologies if this was not for me........:o , going for a bath, need to freshen up.......:D

marshallka

pinknico wrote: »

What did they do to Bathgatebuyer that was unlawful?

Here

got a letter from the FOS yesterday in which they've said that they have everything they need from me in relation to my complaint about Sainsburys and their failure to provide a CCA which contained the prescribed terms and conditions

marshallka

bathgatebuyer wrote: »

At first the FOS said they would not investigate as it was not their job to 'police bank or tell them how to manage their administrative procedures' but the OFT response said that the banks should not be seeking to enforce an agreement that it lacking in the prescribed terms as to do so would be unlawful. The appropriate body to take it to would be the FOS.

Things have got somewhat confused and I'm wondering whether the FOS can cope with more than one issue in a single complaint!!!

I've also written to the OFT to ask them for clarification as to the refusal of Sainsburys to put the account on hold and continue to add interest and charges while there is a clear dispute in place. They were very quick with their response the last time and I'm hoping they send such a clear reponse this time which will help reinforce this point too.

Oh, so the agreement is not ended, mine are ended but they were not executed agreements anyway as they never signed them...:eek: