PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

m.colak

angelwillow wrote: »

Contacted them like you said but this is the response I got I'm afraid.

Unfortunately, this Association has no involvement or remit in respect of this type of credit or the associated insurance. The FSA is the regulator for general insurance matters and you may find it helpful to telephone the Financial Services Ombudsman (FOS) on its helpline number 0845 080 1800.

Ok i guess you have not had any help from the FOS then previously. I would contact the FSA and ask whom regulated GE Money prior to the FOS taking over involvement. That will be just a phone call. If you have no joy and you have all the documentation then the only choice is the courts.

m.colak

stuandrich wrote: »

Hi, I am new to the site and this is my first post and I hope you all can help.

In 2004 I applied for a loan from first plus for £21000 - with this they added a premium of £4185.30 to the loan and I began making payments of £280-86. Through a series of unfortunate events, the following June I had to top up the loan.

They refunded only a small proportion of the PPI and I took a further £12000 - making my new borrowing £36000 (including what I still owed them). They then requoted the PPI and added a premium of £7174.80 - making the total loan £43,174.80 paying £352.26.


Now I came across this site recently and have been reading lots of your posts and I am quite angry. One with myself for being ripped off with a large PPI premium for which I will pay interest on for the next 15 years, and second that Firstplus is allowed to promote these awful insurances.

My added problem is that I (apparently) will be due cash back on the premium in 20 months time - I phoned today and checked.

Could anyone shed any light as to whether I have a case to claim back either my premium, the interest I have paid or push for a lower monthly payment figure ? Has anyone any experience of whether trying to claim will affectFirstplus returning my original premium ?

I am sooooo confused

Any advice / help is very gratefully accepted

Thanks in advance

Ok first of all remember that PPI is optional and you never had to take it out in the first place. Second it sounds that you have been on the rear end of a disproportional rebate scam that a lot of the companies do. What you'll actually find is the first payments you were making on the loan were to pay for the PPI and interest which is common in a Front Loaded policy. I would clarify that the loan isn't front loaded and then continue from there.

abchu

The letter I got back from the Halifax re my personal loan was similar to the response your son had..the customer relations manger also said that he couldn't find any evidance that I was being mis sold!!! as if they think that we are all stupid - like they would file anything on record so that they'll have evidance against themselves! how patronsing was that?! so yeah just have to wait and see now..

angelwillow

m.colak wrote: »

Ok i guess you have not had any help from the FOS then previously. I would contact the FSA and ask whom regulated GE Money prior to the FOS taking over involvement. That will be just a phone call. If you have no joy and you have all the documentation then the only choice is the courts.

FOS have been helpful with other companys but say GE weren't regulated by them at the time. Will try FSA like you suggest.
Thanks

abchu

Tabitha72 wrote: »

I have helped my son to make a claim to Lloyds TSB for PPI using the templates provided by this site ( thanks for those ).
He was told upon application for the loan (£3000 ) that he would not get a loan without taking out their insurance.
He has received a reply in essence stating that Lloyds TSB never force people to take out insurance & as the box was ticked ( by computer !), he obviously agreed to voluntarily take out the insurance. They say that they find in their own favour & owe him nothing.
Can anyone advise please.

The letter I got back from the Halifax re my personal loan was similar to the response your son had..the customer relations manger also said that he couldn't find any evidance that I was being mis sold!!! as if they think that we are all stupid - like they would file anything on record so that they'll have evidance against themselves! how patronsing was that?! so yeah just have to wait and see now..

angelwillow

m.colak wrote: »

If you have no joy and you have all the documentation then the only choice is the courts.

I only have a copy of an agreement signed in the shop at the time - the assistant didn't explain the insurance or even say it was optional.But don't know if this would be enough to stand up in court.

Am I on a road to nowhere with this?

m.colak

angelwillow wrote: »

I only have a copy of an agreement signed in the shop at the time - the assistant didn't explain the insurance or even say it was optional.But don't know if this would be enough to stand up in court.

Am I on a road to nowhere with this?

Ok this is a giveme. Halifax became a member of the GISC (General Insurance Standards Council) in 2001. In 2005 this responsibility got taken over by the FSA. The Halifax voluntarily signed up to this organisation whose mandates under rule 42 states that anybody whom sells insurance must be trained and part of the GISC (registered as an insurance broker/intermediary). If you check under the financial services and markets act 2000 i think its acticles 26 and 27 which stipulate the invalidity of any insurance product sold by someone whom doesn't have the proper authorisation to carry out said product. So to that end if you do take it to court (or you could just ask for the information) under section 18.1 of CPR (this relates to court proceedings only) you request the name, position and length of time the person had been with the Halifax before they sold you the product and also you would like both when they, the person, became registered with the GISC and had relevant training in the selling of Halifax Insurance products.

niemowle

clever people out there !!!!
please if you have got a minute, could you check this letter if all make sense, i would be very happy,as you can see i took a lot of info from loads of others posts, hope it makes sense, please be honest, do i need to add anything,put any figures in or take anything out, here it is, sorry it's a bit long:


I am writing in response to your letter dated the *****, with regards the insurance sold with my loan. Your reference is: ****** I take it as your final response.

I do not feel that your letter has offered a satisfactory justification that my policy was sold fairly, reasonably and within my best interests and I would like to express my disappointment through this letter.

In order to refresh your memory I shall briefly summarise again why I was mis-sold this policy:
-this is due to the fact that I paid a single premium for my policy but did not see it through to the end of it’s initial term after paying back my loan earlier than planned on the *****
-your salesperson did not give me full information on what the policy would and would not cover for example that the loan only covers the first five years of my loan term and also that I could get the cover elsewhere
-I paid upfront for the PPI but it was not explained to me that there were some PPI policies where I could pay monthly
-my PPI was an upfront premium and I repaid the loan early and received no refund


To outline the situation further for you, in order for you to make a fair and informed decision, I will try to go more into details to point why I am so disappointed.
On the day I visited *** branch -*****- I was enduring financial difficulties, my husband was self-employed and things were not going right way financially then, so a loan was my only option. The salesperson was very brief in his explanations and answers and therefore I believe I have not been explained properly to, for example that the loan only covered the first five years of my loan term, I think that was crucial for me to be informed about at the time as I would not have agreed to it otherwise. It has only become apparent to me after the recent coverage by media, and the following the recent OFT and FSA investigations regarding the mis-selling of PPI by finance companies. Regarding the loan with the PPI applied, I believe that I have been gravely mis-led and have been mis-sold this expensive insurance that I did not need. I am truly shocked that you have operated my loan account in this way as I had always repose confidence in your integrity end expertise as my fiduciary ever since I became your customer in *****. I was never told that I could get the PPI elsewhere, no option whatsoever, I was led to believe that I had to take it with Barclays only, I believe that the single premium policy sold to me essentially made me borrow more money rather than simply pay a monthly fee for insurance. I also believe that it should have been made clear to me that the policy generated large profits for Barclays at my expense. You clearly failed to do this and in so doing have failed in your “Duty of Disclosure” to me. This is because insurance contracts are basically Contracts Uberrimae Fidei (contracts of the utmost good faith). This imposes on you a duty to disclose all material facts because one party, Barclays in this case, is in a strong position to know the truth. Your failure to disclose these facts to me is Negligent Misrepresentation under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 and as such under case law, the onus us upon you to prove otherwise.
I would like to point out another failure on your behalf. As I mentioned above my PPI was an upfront premium and I repaid the loan early and received no refund, if that’s the case, and it clearly is, the Financial Services Authority take the view “that this type of term may be unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. This is because, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it could cause a significant imbalance in parties’ rights and obligations under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.” I have no doubt in my success in court over this point, should the need arise here.

In response to the points in your letter, yes, I was aware of the T’s and C’s of the policy, which is why I knew it was of negligible benefit to me. However, as I mentioned above, the T’s and C’s were run through with me by the salesperson, somewhat briefly,I was led to believe it had to be in place for the full term of the loan and I do not believe I was in receipt of the booklet.
As for the 30 –day cooling off period I believed that your staff would not lie to me over the T’s and C’s of my acceptability for the loan so that is why I did not challenge it as you said in your last letter to me that “our staff are monitored on monthly basis”.
Again, this is not an acceptable or fair reason on your part to confirm that the policy was sold fairly or reasonably.

Your concealment of the act of mis-selling has prevented me from asserting my right until now. I believe that there are strong grounds for action against you under common law, statute and consumer regulations.
I am extremely upset that this situation has arised. I have got financial problems now and I am fully responsible for this. However, I am not prepared to take responsibility for the amount of money plus interest you have loaned to me.

I previously wrote to you to ask you to refund all premiums paid with interest equal to you APR at the time plus 8% statutory interest, (the amount a court would award) under the accepted principle of mutuality and reciprocity. You have not responded positively to this request.
I did hope that you would enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and start taking my letters seriously on the assumption that you would prefer to do this rather than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets.
When I finally did receive your response I do not feel that your letter has offered a satisfactory justification that my policy was sold fairly, reasonably and within my best interests so I request that you look into my complaint again. If I do not receive a more favourable response within 14 days I shall be taking my complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.


Yours sincerely,

SUFC

m.colak wrote: »

Hi SUFC if you took it down the small claims route then its up to you wether you feel confident enough to represent yourself or not. It sounds like they've submitted their defense so yes it is going to court. Don't worry will give you some assistance when was the loan started if you don't mind me asking.

Hi, thanks for responding, the loan was taken out in Aug 2005, taken out over 60 months but then paid off early in Nov 2005. I don't feel confident to represent myself, so what do i need to do, who do i need to contact? I have a copy of their defence that they have so kindly sent me, even though they have informed me that the court will send a copy. Is that to scare me? Will the court send me the allocations questionaire now that i have previously read about? What assistance can you offer me please, anything would be good. Regards, SUFC

marshallka

m.colak wrote: »

Hi have you contacted, via letter, bespoke finance including a copy of the letter from first plus with them admitting no liability. This is your next step. If they do this then immediately contact the FOS as it means that never company are accepting liabilty.

Apparently Firstplus have contacted Bespoke on my behalf. They said they would then write to me with Bespokes phone number although i have never heard of Bespoke Finance and certainly had no dealings with Bespoke. I will ring Firstplus again today if no letter arrives. Apparently from what other people on here have said Bespoke were not regulated at the time i took out my loan. Does that mean i will not be covered by the FOS? Who do i contact then if they are not. I will find out if they were regulated for myself first.