PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

di3004

So what do you think my chances are with the letter I sent today ?;)

Cheers.

tiggrae

jingle68 wrote: »

thankyou very much, i just need to find a way of obtaining my loan info or even getting a reply from A&L despite sending 2 recorded delivery letters??

just traced through CreditExpert the following

Alliance & Leicester Personal Finance
loan started 08/12/2001
loan settled 09/01/2006
loan amount £5000
Repayments £145 over 48 months
total repaid £6960

I cant remember the interest rate so i dont know how much of a claim for mis-selling i have if i can trace the loan account details


jingle68

if you're making a complaint to the FOS that's all the information you'll need - look at the complaint form it's very simple to fill in - if you don't know the account number just put unknown but was taken out on such and such a date - the FOS have far more power to request info from A&L then you do !!!!

di3004

The letter


Unfair Rebate Reclaim/
Account Number:

Dear

I refer to your letter dated 12 August 2008 in which you stated that my “new complaint” of an “unfair rebate” of the policy that we had with yourselves fell outside the Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

I have today received some advice about this matter and it has been confirmed to me as the complaint is about the “settlement” of the policy and the date of my settlement of this was November 2005 then this is a matter that the Financial Ombudsman service will be able to assist with.

I am surprised by your little knowledge on this matter, and just in case you receive any similar complaints then I suggest that you get the facts right before actually writing to customers with this misleading information.

Please read my letter dated 30th July 2008 again where you will note that this is about an “Unfair Settlement” which had taken place in November 2005.
I have enclosed a copy of this letter for your records.

As this event had taken place in November 2005 when settling this product, I request for you to reconsider this complaint as a “New complaint of unfair rebate Settlement” and uphold this complaint as and refund what is due to me and that also of 8% of what a court would award.

Due to this reason of “unfair rebate settlement” and the misleading information on your letter dated 12 August 2008 I am aware the Financial Ombudsman Service will be able to adjudicate in this matter and also the FSA started regulating on 14 January 2005 where this definitely comes into regulation of Jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service. So I am now preparing to take this further to these, so if you could respond within 7 days of this letter as this complaint has already been over the requested time going from the letter 30th July 2008, and I believe these 7 days are fair from the date of this letter, in order to give you a chance to add anything further or for you to resolve this matter, I enclose copies of all correspondence.

Please refer to my letter dated 30 July 2008, and reconsider this request for a refund.
I look forward to hearing from you within 7 days of this letter.

Yours sincerely

di3004

Okay, if this comes back again and this is refused, I will forward a letter onto the HFC and/or HSBC who are all linked, that would be the end of trying to pursue with these, it will then have to be court.

They should refer to the letter I sent dated 30 July 2008 which Tiggrae helped me with, I also enclosed a copy of it with the letter sent today.

I may have made a few mistakes in the letter today and if I am wrong with what I have stated to them I will have to live with that....:rolleyes: , but its the letter send July they should go back to.;)

di

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Okay, if this comes back again and this is refused, I will forward a letter onto the HFC and/or HSBC who are all linked, that would be the end of trying to pursue with these, it will then have to be court.

They should refer to the letter I sent dated 30 July 2008 which Tiggrae helped me with, I also enclosed a copy of it with the letter sent today.

I may have made a few mistakes in the letter today and if I am wrong with what I have stated to them I will have to live with that....:rolleyes: , but its the letter send July they should go back to.;)

di

Di, that letter should be ok, (if i am wrong then i apologise) its when you take your complaint to FOS that you have to make it for the unfair rebate of a loan contract that was used to pay an insurance premium. Its still within jurisdiction of the FOS if they were (and they were) FSA regulated when you settled. You are not making an "Insurance" complaint. I doubt FOS would see your settlement as "reasonable and fair". Its your credit agreement that is unfair.

Consumers have the right to complain about lenders and other credit businesses to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and to challenge unfair credit agreements in court. (although i do not know a date for this one and perhaps again tiggrae may confirm).

I asked FOS about my unfair settlement and FIrstplus and THEY confirmed to me that it was something they could look into and let me send in all the details etc for this reason. The only reason that it was dismissed was because my settlement was 2003 and they were not registered with the FSA until 2005. It actually states that in my letter from them. Both incidents are outside the dates for our looking into this for you.

I wish tiggrae would confirm this again. She seems to think that you will be ok. She has written here for you


"After speaking to the FOS about unfair rebates (ie after the FSA produced their findings on unfair refunds on single premium insurances see - Refunds of Single Premium Payment Protection Insurance ) then the FOS will look at this type of complaint".


But what dates are applicable to this Tiggrae. We need to know????

marshallka

Just found this on the consumer forums

disputes involving Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Each year, we receive a significant number of complaints that involve Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – under which, in certain circumstances, the provider of credit is equally liable with the provider of goods or services where there is a breach of contract or misrepresentation.
Up until now, almost all these complaints have involved credit card transactions (both at home and abroad). However, going forward we expect our work in this area to expand, reflecting our new consumer credit jurisdiction and the extension of our existing jurisdiction to include complaints about point-of-sale loans and store cards.
We often encounter some common misunderstandings when assessing these cases. The first is the belief among some lenders that consumers can only claim against them after they have first sued the provider of the goods or services. In fact, no such requirement exists and consumers can choose which party to claim against.
Where consumers come to us to check the position, we can point out the lender's mistake. But of course we cannot know how many consumers take the lender's assertion at face value and then spend time and effort trying to pursue a trader who may prove difficult to trace. If it seems to us that the lender has misled the consumer about the provisions of Section 75, and this has caused the consumer unnecessary expense or inconvenience, then this is likely to be reflected in any award we may make.
The second misunderstanding we frequently come across is the belief by some consumers that Section 75 entitles them to a refund on any purchase made with credit. Some consumers also confuse the rights given to them by Section 75 with the automatic insurance coverage that some credit card issuers provide.
For Section 75 to apply, in the first instance the following four conditions must all be satisfied:

• The cash price of the goods or services bought by the consumer must be at least £100 and no more than £30,000.
• The amount of credit provided to the consumer towards the purchase must not exceed £25,000, and must have been provided to an 'individual' (which includes sole traders, small partnerships and unincorporated businesses, as well as ordinary consumers).
• The provider of credit must be in the business of lending money, and the credit agreement must have been made in the course of that business.
• The credit must have been provided to the consumer under pre-existing arrangements between the provider of credit and the supplier of the goods and services.

If all these conditions are satisfied, there is a 'lender-borrower-supplier' chain and the lender will have equal liability for misrepresentation or breach of contract by the merchant. There is no automatic entitlement to a refund under Section 75 where, for example, the customer has simply changed their mind.
In April 2008, the current maximum financial limit of £25,000 for regulated credit agreements will be removed. The effect of this has not been entirely understood by some consumers and consumer advisers, who have asked us to deal with claims in respect of much larger cash value purchases in 'anticipation' of unlimited Section 75 coverage next year. In fact, the cash price limits within Section 75 will not be affected by the changes in April 2008 – so we will still be unable to consider claims about purchases costing more then £30,000.
The following selection of recent Section 75-related case studies illustrates some of the issues we have had to decide.
case studies


May be of use to someone

marshallka

Also this is good leaflet

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/introduction_consumercredit.pdf

Laini

Morning everyone:hello:

got some of my SAR back from Goldfish 2 years of statements individual sent in the post so recieved 24 envelopes- god was I sick of opening them plus they put in envelopes to send payment in each one so 24 goldfish processing dept envelopes will be sent back individually of course with nothing in them.!!- maybe it was to wind me up who knows.

no news from FOS about Nemo


no news from Barclaycard concerning PPI refund

hope everyone is ok
I am reading posts but you all seem to be on the ball so I havent commented on anything -so just here for support.

catch you later
Laini xx:j

marshallka

We are actually at a loss here........


Di is claiming against endeavour for unfair rebate. According to Tiggrae, FOS will look into complaints about this and take the date of settlement as the date of applicable to the claim. We need this confirming and its soooo confusing. If you read back over the posts then you will see Di was told by Endeavour the following

""As your complaints relates to an event which took place prior to 6 April 2007, the Financial Ombudsman Service would be unable to adjudicate on a complaint against Endeavour Personal Finance.""

Does this looks to be a "Consumer Credit" area and not the date that they were FSA registered. If so when was FOS able to look into complaints about consumer credit.(was it from April 2007). Singlep seems to think the claim has to be on the against the loan for the ppi so does this mean a consumer credit area also. If this is so then the loan is a "contract", the PPI was a "loan" and you can claim unfair terms in consumer contracts as advisers failed to act in customer's best interest, Misrepresentation etc etc.

I wish tiggrae could explain to us.

Also if you are complaining about a consumer credit issue then is it ok to bring your complaint to FOS within six years (or the 3 years that you should have been reasonably aware) of the April 2007 jurisdiction and therefore you can go back to 2001. (If the company was FSA registered at the date that the incident happened??? or is it just if they had a consumer credit licence????), or is it for events that have actually happened after April 2007????

If the first part is correct then Di is ok and Endeavour have it wrong in that she only became aware of this recently and Endeavour were regulated by the FSA at the time of her settlement and did have a CCL too.


I understand what i mean here but i'm not too good at explaining it.

Anyone care to agree/disagree with me here

Just found this

Prior to 6th April 2007, the Financial Ombudsman Service covered all businesses regulated by the FSA including banks, mortgage firms, insurance companies and financial advisers. This included around 70% of the consumer credit market by value. From 6th April coverage will be expanded to all businesses holding consumer credit licenses, meaning the ombudsman service will be able to consider a wider range of complaints about financial matters from car loans to pawn broking and from store cards to hire purchase.


So does this mean that as long as they are FSA registered at the time of the "consumer credit" incident then you are ok to ask for help from FOS.

marshallka

This is also a good leaflet to read


http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/cp/cp07_14.pdf