PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

di3004

Hi Marshallka.;)

Oh no not your puter now:eek: .......:mad: , maddening, hope it gets all sorted soon hun.;) I was very frustrated with mine and borrowing other people's just don't feel the same does it hunni ?:rolleyes:

Hope to catch you later then.;)

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I am up and running again.... it was the socket thats gone capoot and not my card...:j

Pheeeewwww thank goodness for that - happy you have this sorted hun and glad your back !:D :beer: :j .

bathgatebuyer

lilac_lee wrote: »

Hi
I am looking for some advice, i had three loans with RBS they are now finished, however i wrote to them reclaiming my PPI back all for the same reason of being mis sold. I got two responses regarding two of them saying that they did not believe that they were mis sold so would not be refunding us anything (they amounts they qouted were £4000 and £2000). This was about 2 months ago, and yesterday in the post i received a letter for the 3rd one saying that they looked into it and could not find enough info regarding the PPI so would be refunding it to us (£594) which i am extreemly please about. My only question now is why were the other two claims refused when they were all taken out for the same reason. Would it be becase of the amounts were much higher. Should i now go back to them regarding the other two. Or just be gratefull for the £594 (which i am)

Any advice would be great.

Thanks

Lee

Did you request copies of CCAs for these? Perhaps the discrepancy is that they cannot find any documentation relating to that account but can for the others?

di3004

learning_to_drive wrote: »

Hi, Morning guys

My girlfriend was blatantly mis-sold her PPI by the lovely man at Natty west, having met him I can see why, he hasnt a clue.

We have begun the reclamation procedure and sent off the original letter, however it was by first class post and not recorded, this was around 3 months ago and we have had nothing back from them.

What should we do? Re-send the first letter or go to stage 2?

All advice is welcome.

Hello there.

Hmmm, I bet they did receive the letter but because this was not recorded they are not admitting it.
Personally I would re-send the letter, first class recorded delivery, this way as you know it can be tracked down on the royal mail web site, they have nothing to deny then.;)

Good luck!
Di.
x

di3004

I will have to crack on with some letters this week, need to be stronger I think now, one to "END" and the other to "Click".

Even if Click has dissolved the FSCS cannot do anything with these as these were not regulated or covered by anyone when I had this product..... , with a bit of luck though the other Eloan/Twopart it will be declared in default in order for the FSCS to go further with this one, because this one was taken in Nov 2005 and were covered.;)

Fingers crossed.:D

Carlnorth

Hello all

This is my first post to this forum. I have recently had my request for a refund withheld by Natwest (RBS PPI Customer Concerns Team Regulatory risk).

I have tried to claim back my single premium PPI which I took out with my Natwest personal loan back in 2006.

Having reviewed my complaint, RBS have decided to upheld it due to the fact that I had signed all of the appropriate forms when applying for the loan. These forms have been photocopied and sent to me with their explanation, and my signature highlighted.

This is all very well, but I was shocked to notice that having highlighted and based some of his review on the 'Loan Customer Duty of care checklist' , the signature on this form is clearly not mine. This angers me, as he has mentioned in his letter that I confirmed that I had read and understood this document and signed to take it in association with the loan.

Of course, I cannot blame anyone in particular for the forgery of my signature, all I know is that it is not mine and it bears a resemblence to the rest of the writing on the form.

Should I take this up with the Financial Ombudsman? And continue to fight for my refund?

Many Thanks for reading this
Carl

di3004

Carlnorth wrote: »

Hello all

This is my first post to this forum. I have recently had my request for a refund withheld by Natwest (RBS PPI Customer Concerns Team Regulatory risk).

I have tried to claim back my single premium PPI which I took out with my Natwest personal loan back in 2006.

Having reviewed my complaint, RBS have decided to upheld it due to the fact that I had signed all of the appropriate forms when applying for the loan. These forms have been photocopied and sent to me with their explanation, and my signature highlighted.

This is all very well, but I was shocked to notice that having highlighted and based some of his review on the 'Loan Customer Duty of care checklist' , the signature on this form is clearly not mine. This angers me, as he has mentioned in his letter that I confirmed that I had read and understood this document and signed to take it in association with the loan.

Of course, I cannot blame anyone in particular for the forgery of my signature, all I know is that it is not mine and it bears a resemblence to the rest of the writing on the form.

Should I take this up with the Financial Ombudsman? And continue to fight for my refund?

Many Thanks for reading this
Carl

Hi Carl
That is what you call fraud, if this is not your signature signed then obviously you have the right idea about taking this one further.

I would also contact the FSA hun, see what they have to say, personally I would ring and not email, this way you will get your answer quicker in where to go from here.
Check out the contacts on:

http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk/about_the_fsa/contact/contact_us.html

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=FSA+consumer+complaints+contacts&meta=

Good luck Carl, keep us informed hun, thanks.;)

Di.
x

spoll_2

marshallka wrote: »

I have just been looking into this and if your loan/ppi was 2006 then i am sure that Norton Finance would have had to have been regulated to sell insurance. Can someone else please confirm this.... it was all regulated by the FSA in 2005. You say this letter was from the FOS too. I would wait for Tiggrae on this one. Something is wrong here.
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/ins_reg.pdf

They had to have been authrorised to make this sale.

Just got my dad to read me the letter - it says that at the time the loan took place (Feb 2006) Norton was not a member of the General insurance standarss council or FOS.

They've also sent back the complaints form that I sent them - what is going on?!?!?

I think the best thing to do is for me to ring the FOS - why do things never go to plan for me!!

Will keep you informed....

marshallka

spoll wrote: »

Just got my dad to read me the letter - it says that at the time the loan took place (Feb 2006) Norton was not a member of the General insurance standarss council or FOS.

They've also sent back the complaints form that I sent them - what is going on?!?!?

I think the best thing to do is for me to ring the FOS - why do things never go to plan for me!!

Will keep you informed....

All sales of insurance should have been regulated by the FSA at that time. I am almost sure. Perhaps someone else would back me up here. Did you take a look at the link i put on my post.

spoll_2

marshallka wrote: »

All sales of insurance should have been regulated by the FSA at that time. I am almost sure. Perhaps someone else would back me up here. Did you take a look at the link i put on my post.

Yeah just been looking at the link and like you I can't see how they were't regulated. I'll ring them 2mrw and see what is what.

Thanks Marshallka for the link and your help.