PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

marshallka

singlep wrote: »

Tiggrae may be right but this is new to me. So, if everyone who was missold PPI before jan 05 ceased the policy and requested the rebate they would be able to claim to FOS as at that time all rebates were unfair. So why doesn't everyone do this if their adviser was non GISC? At least you get the premium although not the interest paid.

Would be nice wouldn't it...:D

I think if its not within jurisdcition then it should be. We have maybe jumped the gun a bit here:eek: Or not???????

I don't think so, if you make a claim for misselling and its not within jurisdiciton then the unfair rebate is within the dates its the company who the loan is with that is responsible for the unfair rebate (and not the sales person of the PPI) that is at fault here and its the date that the unfair rebate is that is the date that you realised you had been done. If that date is after 2005 then you should be allowed to make a claim but its a different department at FOS to misselling.

I have two claims against the Co-op. One is for misselling and comes within the jurisdiction of the FOS and the other is outside for the sale but my settlement date is within the time and jurisdiction. Therefore i have asked them to look at my unfair rebate on the other.

di3004

Not to worry hun, if I got to take the case to court I will.;)

Worth trying to pursue with the lenders first anyway to exhaust these options.;)


But as these were linked to HFC and still are, it maybe worth me going that direction as a last option, or HSBC as Endeavour have been linked to these as from 2001 to what I know of and these were regulated...I think as also from 2001 or maybe earlier.......:rolleyes:

The letter I received today was on the Endeavour paperwork but sent by HFC complaints.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Not to worry hun, if I got to take the case to court I will.;)

Worth trying to pursue with the lenders first anyway to exhaust these options.;)


But as these were linked to HFC and still are, it maybe worth me going that direction as a last option, or HSBC as Endeavour have been linked to these as from 2001 to what I know of and these were regulated...I think as also from 2001 or maybe earlier.......:rolleyes:

The letter I received today was on the Endeavour paperwork but sent by HFC complaints.

I think FOS does look at unfair rebates. I read it somewhere on that site with your story on and they said on there that if you could not claim for misselling then make a claim for unfair rebate and take the date of settlement as the date you were unfair rebated. This would mean a lot less court cases and a lot more work for FOS. (LOL)

I will give them a ring tomorrow to confirm this but i went for firstplus for this and they wrote back to say my complaint fell outside jurisdiciton on both counts (misselling and unfair settlement) as my sale was 2001 and my settlement was 2003 and they did not become regulated by the FSA until 2005. They took the date of settlement and not the date of sale.

marshallka

I have just read in the FSA handbook

Time Barred

If a respondent receive a complaint which is outside the time limits for referral to the FOS it may reject the complaint without considering the merits but must explain to the complainant in a final response and indicate that the ombudsman may waive time limits in exceptional circumstances.

Who does that ey?????

They actually tell us we have no chance of complaining all the time.


I read this on the FSA handbook thing about "which complaints can be dealt with by the ombudsman."

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I think FOS does look at unfair rebates. I read it somewhere on that site with your story on and they said on there that if you could not claim for misselling then make a claim for unfair rebate and take the date of settlement as the date you were unfair rebated. This would mean a lot less court cases and a lot more work for FOS. (LOL)

I will give them a ring tomorrow to confirm this but i went for firstplus for this and they wrote back to say my complaint fell outside jurisdiciton on both counts (misselling and unfair settlement) as my sale was 2001 and my settlement was 2003 and they did not become regulated by the FSA until 2005. They took the date of settlement and not the date of sale.

Good luck hun, let me know what they say.;)
Thanks.

Di.
x

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I have just read in the FSA handbook

If a respondent receive a complaint which is outside the time limits for referral to the FOS it may reject the complaint without considering the merits but must explain to the complainant in a final response and indicate that the ombudsman may waive time limits in exceptional circumstances.

Who does that ey?????

They actually tell us we have no chance of complaining all the time.


http://fsahandbook.info/FSA/handbook/LI/2008/2008_18.pdf

Good find here hunni - well done.:D

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Good find here hunni - well done.:D

Its about time barred complaints.

marshallka

FOS does not just deal with complaints about insurance, they deal with complaints about finance and i understand about the CCA too. So can anyone tell us is it only firms that were regulated by the FSA we can complain about or ones that had a consumer credit licence too prior to the FSA regulating business's.

Say a business is regulated by the FSA in 2003 and your complaint is about an unfair rebate of insurance then surely this is a complaint not for misselling of insurance (which came under the FSA in 2005) but for unfair contract terms and should be elegible for going to FOS with. I think i understand what singlep was trying to say. It does not matter about the 2005 thing if you are complaining about insurance rebates, what matters is if they were FSA regulated and if it was 2003 that they were regulated then your claim would be one that FOS could look at. But under unfair contract terms or misrepresentation and not for anything to do with dates of the insurance regulation.

These claims are about the date of the firm being regulated by the FSA and not the date that insurance became regulated by the FSA.


Tiggrae, singlep you are needed here.


(FOS) was set up to resolve disputes between consumers and firms. Its decision making is independent of FSA. The FOS provides a mechanism for resolving disputes which is a simple, informal and accessible alternative to the courts. Its compulsory jurisdiction covers complaints against authorised firms concerning their regulated activities and certain specified other financial services activities. It is provided free of charge to complainants. The FOS's decisions are based on what is 'fair and reasonable' and are binding on firms if a complainant accepts them.


The FOS covers all retail financial businesses regulated by the FSA and from April 2007 it also covers all businesses that have a standard consumer credit licence from the Office of Fair Trading. This means that in addition to covering activities regulated by the Financial Services Authority the FOS also covers credit activities, as set out in the Consumer Credit Act 2006

We then have to wait for FOS to determine what is fair and reasonable.




I would have thought that Di's rebate would definately be thought of as unfair.

Terms are regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, they cause a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer

tiggrae

jingle68 wrote: »

I took out a personal loan from Alliance & Leicester in Dec 2001, i applied online, received a phone call stating i MUST take out PPI to get the loan approved.
That is all the info i have, unfortunately i applied just after leaving hospital after a serious car accident (hit by drunk driver), i took out the loan to purchase another car, dont know why i applied because i had 2 broken legs,a fractured skull & a brain injury?? there was no chance of me driving for months.
Because of the head injury, i have no idea or info on the loan details,when it started or finished or its ID.
I have written to A&L twice & have had no reply.
I need to trace this loan because i believe i was mis-sold the PPI because i was forced to take it out to get the loan.
My bank details do not go back far enough for me to find the payments taken.
Please can somebody help me to trace this loan info??

thank you.

Hi there, you're in luck - the Alliance & Leicester came under the jurisdiction of the FOS on 01/12/2001 - how lucky is that - so if you've made a complaint to the A&L and after 8 weeks received no response then make a complaint to the FOS (you can download the complaint form from their website - include a copy the letter you've sent and the reminder - they should have responded to you within 8 weeks so if it's over that you're well within your rights to commence your complaint with the FOS

tiggrae

di3004 wrote: »

Jingle68, I have checked on the FSA register and there are that many groups involving A&L, where one I checked were not regulated by the FSA until 2005, where this would be difficult if further action had to be taken, for example the Financial Ombudsman Service, but if these were under the GISC firm regulators then it should be okay.

With a bit of luck if you try to reclaim this with them you may be lucky and they may even refund you, but its not always that simple.

If you have ANY sort of paperwork at all about these there should be a regulators register number on them, we can then double check if these were then regulated or not for when you had this product, in case I have the wrong firm.

Going by your reasons though hunni, A&L should be ashamed of themselves by telling you that you must have this, I think you should still try and go for it, because even if you mentioned on the letter that further action will be taken if may get them thinking, because I'm sure you have every chance of winning this even if it went to "small claims court".;)

Maybe Tiggrae or Marshallka could also have some further advice here for you.

Di.
x

no di A&L plc were registered on 01/12/2001