PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

m.colak

marshallka wrote: »

i have sent all my complaint to the FOS with regard to "non status lenders" as i did with Fistplus as i felt the same as you, that they were not regulated. I have just rang the OFT and asked them again when firstplus was regulated and she said they were regualted by them in 2005 to sell insurance and that she had no idea what i meant by "non status lenders". I am now totally confused as i thought all my information i had sent to the FOS about the OFT asking "non status lenders to stop using the rule 78" was correct and that Firstplus was non status meaning not regulated. This is doing my head in. (they were part of barclays in nov 2000 so which are they, status or non status)

Easier answer but please don't rip your hair out. They were non-status lenders when you got the loan then they became status lenders in Nov 2000. At which time they should of in theory let you know that they now were owned by Barclay's and sent you a new terms and conditions which explained any changed in their refunds policy (I'm guessing they didn't). This means that your original statement to the FOS is correct. See what i mean by smoke screen what i advise (this is strong advice) go make yourself a cup of tea and sit down for half an hour with either a good book or mag and just take your mind off the whole thing for a little while (I'm not being patronising please believe me). I will still be here so don't worry i'm not going anywhere. Then we can start working through this stage by stage.

One question though and this is a test now-

Who was responsible for the selling of the PPI?:D

m.colak

marshallka wrote: »

i have sent all my complaint to the FOS with regard to "non status lenders" as i did with Fistplus as i felt the same as you, that they were not regulated. I have just rang the OFT and asked them again when firstplus was regulated and she said they were regualted by them in 2005 to sell insurance and that she had no idea what i meant by "non status lenders". I am now totally confused as i thought all my information i had sent to the FOS about the OFT asking "non status lenders to stop using the rule 78" was correct and that Firstplus was non status meaning not regulated. This is doing my head in. (they were part of barclays in nov 2000 so which are they, status or non status)

God what a fool i have made of myself now. I have just looked at the thing about non status lending and it is about borrowing money to people that have no credit history or have an impaired credit rating. Its nothing about the status of the lender.

Hey now we both have learnt something please read the above post:D

marshallka

m.colak wrote: »

Easier answer but please don't rip your hair out. They were non-status lenders when you got the loan then they became status lenders in Nov 2000. At which time they should of in theory let you know that they now were owned by Barclay's and sent you a new terms and conditions which explained any changed in their refunds policy (I'm guessing they didn't). This means that your original statement to the FOS is correct. See what i mean by smoke screen what i advise (this is strong advice) go make yourself a cup of tea and sit down for half an hour with either a good book or mag and just take your mind off the whole thing for a little while (I'm not being patronising please believe me). I will still be here so don't worry i'm not going anywhere. Then we can start working through this stage by stage.

One question though and this is a test now-

Who was responsible for the selling of the PPI?:D

I really do not know yet. Firstplus say Freedom Finance and Freedom Finance say Bespoke Finance.

m.colak

marshallka wrote: »

I really do not know yet. Firstplus say Freedom Finance and Freedom Finance say Bespoke Finance.

Uhhmmm forget what they say the consumer credit act 1974 says Firstplus are responsible. Told you to read it not skim it

Dicky2K

I took out a bank loan in november 2005 for £8300 and took out the PPI for it too.. then last year approximately October, i phoned Natwest and cancelled the PPI becuase i had left my job (my own fault) and was trying to save money.. They then told me that i still owed in the region of £7000 .. I suspect that the money i had been paying for the whole year went to pay off the PPI in a lump sum. So do you think that i am entitled to claim anything back - Sorry im not great with figures or paperwork if you hadn't guessed.
I look forward to receiving a reply.
Thank you
Regards, Richard

homer_j_3

Robbed? wrote: »

Hello there. I need help ASAP please- I have a claim with Natwest and have sent the first and second letters- my trouble is they still haven't replied- what next??? I know Martin says complain to the FOS but I am a little concerned at the length of time this takes, I really need it sorting ASAP.

What do you lot think?

Stacey x

Unfortunately, this process is not a quick one- whether you go through the FOS or through other legal routes.

You should apply to the FOS if the 8 weeks has passed since your initial complaint went in and you should hear back in 6-9 months with an answer to your complaint. You will get regular holding letters leading upto this point and if the lender agrees to your complaint in the meantime, you can withdraw the complaint.

There are other options out there which will get you back what you are due but it is not a quick process.

m.colak

Dicky2K wrote: »

I took out a bank loan in november 2005 for £8300 and took out the PPI for it too.. then last year approximately October, i phoned Natwest and cancelled the PPI becuase i had left my job (my own fault) and was trying to save money.. They then told me that i still owed in the region of £7000 .. I suspect that the money i had been paying for the whole year went to pay off the PPI in a lump sum. So do you think that i am entitled to claim anything back - Sorry im not great with figures or paperwork if you hadn't guessed.
I look forward to receiving a reply.
Thank you
Regards, Richard

ok first of all ask for the settlement figure again but this time ask for it in writing with a complete breakdown of costs/charges/rebates and final settlement figure. This will tell you if you have been paying the PPI up front or not in which case you will be in a better position to work out whether you have been disproportional rebated or not.

Dicky2K

The settlement figure i have (todays figure) is £5290.15p

Currently paying £190.55 monthly and prior to cancelling the PPI i was paying £225 monthly - i think - I'll have to check that figure.
Had no rebates or anything just monthly statement of

225
225
225
(then changed to 190)
190
190 etc...
Like i said the original loan was 8300, so i just think i was being screwed somhow..

Thank you by the way
Regards, Richard..

m.colak

Dicky2K wrote: »

The settlement figure i have (todays figure) is £5290.15p

Currently paying £190.55 monthly and prior to cancelling the PPI i was paying £225 monthly - i think - I'll have to check that figure.
Had no rebates or anything just monthly statement of

225
225
225
(then changed to 190)
190
190 etc...
Like i said the original loan was 8300, so i just think i was being screwed somhow..

Thank you by the way
Regards, Richard..

ok am guessing here:

225*12
190.55*7
total = 4033.85

so i total you have paid £4033.85 so far and they say that you still owe £7000. Hmmm chances are you are being ripped off but as i said unless you get the quote for the settlement figure written down you won't see how much is left on the loan and how much they add to it. Plus you can't see if they refunded you for the PPI you had already paid.

Dicky2K

Ill pop down the bank at the weekend and speak to them.. - long distance HGV driver so i never get much chance to sort things out.
Thanks for the help.. Ill be in touch