PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

Tron_ess

marshallka wrote: »

Spoll did ring the FOS again after i found this out and apparently they can now send the complaint back in on the info yesterday. I am glad to see someone is looking out for others here. Thanks for that, but if you see the posts made by spoll just after this one it stated that they could resend the complaint in and it would be looked at again.

yep .. did spot. Just highligting the error made by FOS as they really should have known better.
They're really snowed under with PPI complaints at the moment and errors are only natural I guess.

Interestingly - the FOS published in their July Board Report that they will be writing formally to FSA to consider wider implications action in relation to PPI. I think the FOS are just being snowed under with PPI complaints at the moment, and as many firms are not - in line with FSA's own guidance now - taking previous FOS decisions into account when considering new complaints, they're doing all they can. Question now is whether FSA have the teeth to do something about it!

busbyh

Hi all
I e mailed FSCS yestered regarding picture and they have advised me to e mail them with some details of my claim.
I have given them some details in short and they say they will take a look and advise me they are able to look at my claim. They say they can pay claims if a business like 'Picture is unable to, or likely to be unable to pay claims against it.
E mail them with claims for business taken out after 14th January 2005.

• The date you received advice to purchase an Insurance contract with Picture Financial
• Details of contracts purchaed
• Reasons why you wish to bring a complaint.

On receipt of this info they will then see if they are able to help you with a claim.

I have just noticed another thing on the copy of terms and conds rcd from Picture. It actually states Single Premium Policy on the same line as the amount of PPI.
This is not stated on the original.
I
Hopefully I will receive a response for FSCS soon - keep you posted

busbyh

Hi all
I e mailed FSCS yestered regarding picture and they have advised me to e mail them with some details of my claim.
I have given them some details in short and they say they will take a look and advise me they are able to look at my claim. They say they can pay claims if a business like 'Picture is unable to, or likely to be unable to pay claims against it.
E mail them with claims for business taken out after 14th January 2005.

• The date you received advice to purchase an Insurance contract with Picture Financial
• Details of contracts purchaed
• Reasons why you wish to bring a complaint.

On receipt of this info they will then see if they are able to help you with a claim.

I have just noticed another thing on the copy of terms and conds rcd from Picture. It actually states Single Premium Policy on the same line as the amount of PPI.
This is not stated on the original.
I
Hopefully I will receive a response for FSCS soon - keep you posted

Tron_ess

marshallka wrote: »

Well said Tro_ness, we have had some people on the last couple of days that we thought were touting for business and it is something people can do for themselves. If they come unstuck we all help each other. (as far as we are able to - a bit the blind leading the blind at times) but we get there. We are one big happy reclaiming family here.

Many of those operating these "claims" businesses were themeselves part of the problem in recent years.
Its endownment all over again. Wasn't it interesting that many of the nice folk that would help you with your endownmnet complaints were previously IFA's and probably the very same people that were selling them years before. Just a natural cycle for some of these people. They follow the money without scrupples.

marshallka

Tron_ess wrote: »

yep .. did spot. Just highligting the error made by FOS as they really should have known better.
They're really snowed under with PPI complaints at the moment and errors are only natural I guess.

Interestingly - the FOS published in their July Board Report that they will be writing formally to FSA to consider wider implications action in relation to PPI. I think the FOS are just being snowed under with PPI complaints at the moment, and as many firms are not - in line with FSA's own guidance now - taking previous FOS decisions into account when considering new complaints, they're doing all they can. Question now is whether FSA have the teeth to do something about it!

What we need is a register online at the FOS with a jurisdiction thing on so that we can check before hand with dates etc and the type of complaint we are making to see if it is something that they can or cannot deal with. We definately need a GISC register online - something similar to the FSA Register really.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

What we need is a register online at the FOS with a jurisdiction thing on so that we can check before hand with dates etc and the type of complaint we are making to see if it is something that they can or cannot deal with. We definately need a GISC register online - something similar to the FSA Register really.

Yes your right Marshalla hun, it would save loads of time too.;)

Hey maybe someone could suggest this idea to the FOS.....:D , lol

Tron_ess

busbyh wrote: »

Hi all
I e mailed FSCS yestered regarding picture and they have advised me to e mail them with some details of my claim.
I have given them some details in short and they say they will take a look and advise me they are able to look at my claim. They say they can pay claims if a business like 'Picture is unable to, or likely to be unable to pay claims against it.
E mail them with claims for business taken out after 14th January 2005.

• The date you received advice to purchase an Insurance contract with Picture Financial
• Details of contracts purchaed
• Reasons why you wish to bring a complaint.

On receipt of this info they will then see if they are able to help you with a claim.

I have just noticed another thing on the copy of terms and conds rcd from Picture. It actually states Single Premium Policy on the same line as the amount of PPI.
This is not stated on the original.
I
Hopefully I will receive a response for FSCS soon - keep you posted

busbyh
Picture are closed to regulated activity but still a firm. Details of their compliance contact are on the FSA web site.
While i'm sure the FSCS will have things in hand - bare in mind that firms wanting to be registered were required to hold PII (professional indemnity insurance) or a guarantee in lieu. So if FSCS can't help - i'd consider going back to what's left of Picture and making their insurers pay!

di3004

Tron_ess wrote: »

busbyh
Picture are closed to regulated activity but still a firm. Details of their compliance contact are on the FSA web site.
While i'm sure the FSCS will have things in hand - bare in mind that firms wanting to be registered were required to hold PII (professional indemnity insurance) or a guarantee in lieu. So if FSCS can't help - i'd consider going back to what's left of Picture and making their insurers pay!

Yes I agree.
We have one in with the FSCS ourselves this is Eloan who had went into voluntary liquidation, only about 2/3 mths ago, now the FSCS are just waiting to confirm default on this company.

However the other one is that of Click Financial ltd who dissolved in 2006, but when I had this product it was July 2004 and were not regulated at that time, but there is another Click financial with the same directors, what would you say to that one ? does "phoenix firm" ring the bell ??;)

Unfortunatly as these were not regulated at the time, the FSCS are unable to deal with this actual claim.

Tron_ess

di3004 wrote: »

Yes your right Marshalla hun, it would save loads of time too.;)

Hey maybe someone could suggest this idea to the FOS.....:D , lol

Would be great - but then we'd still have the problem of pre-GISC.
Seems to me that FOS are pretty much using GISC standards while GISC was in existence, regardless of whether company was GISC registered. This is causing companies to start disputing and seeking formal judgement. Hence their change of stance - they're arguing that there are systemic issue with this whole market and basically want FSA to force firms to conduct back reviews and pay customers accordingly.
The FSA could have done this with endownments - but chose not to and we know how that ended... so lets hope they have learnt their lesson and hold firms more accountable this time.

Tron_ess

di3004 wrote: »

Yes I agree.
We have one in with the FSCS ourselves this is Eloan who had went into voluntary liquidation, only about 2/3 mths ago, now the FSCS are just waiting to confirm default on this company.

However the other one is that of Click Financial ltd who dissolved in 2006, but when I had this product it was July 2004 and were not regulated at that time, but there is another Click financial with the same directors, what would you say to that one ? does "phoenix firm" ring the bell ??;)

Unfortunatly as these were not regulated at the time, the FSCS are unable to deal with this actual claim.

Di....
Maybe worth writing to the FSA. If the new firm is regulated - and the directors are "controlled functions" and therefore approved... this may call into question their fitness to hold such status. Its a really really long shot ... but bugs me that they should continue to prosper when they've caused many people knowing misery.