PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

gamekeeperturnedpoacher

Hi, ok I am a converted Operations Manager and have specialised in PPI claims and dabbled in policy administration for the last 15 years so, I would like to think that I am reasonably educated in PPI, the sales techniques applied, how your PPI premium is disguised so it is unlikely you know you have it, what the FOS (Financial Ombudsman Service) considers in the event of a complaint, how to play the lender/insurance company within your rights, what profitshare arrangements are in place, how to make a valid claim and get around certain exclusions quite legally, ICOB rules, CAB Super Complaint/OFT/CC issue, TCF inititiave (Treating Customers Fairly), policy terms and conditions consistency (Common Interpretations Initiative), how Insurers investigate suspect claims and more!

I have a similar issue where I have an unsecured loan which I protected with PPI which I did due to the value of my loan (remember I am a claims person and never really got involved in premium costs) and the fact that I was unsure about my employers future in this market. I took PPI with my loan. After 6 months I made a decision to cancel it. I know that the main beneficiary is the lender, the insurer benefits from underwriting profit and mainly the administration fee. Generally you will find that the lender will take 95% of the risk sometimes less sometime 100% which means that for every £1.00 paid in a claim, the lender will pay 95% of that. Conversley, after the IPT and administration charges are accounted for as well as the appropriate legislative reserving, the lender benefits from 95% of the left over premium. To put this in to perspective, the claim incident rate on PPI policies is around 1.5 - 2%. So of 100 customers who take out PPI, only 2 wil claim. The maximum duration of an unemployment or disability claim is on average 5 months. Insurance companies decline on average 20 - 22% of claims so they pay 80% - sounds good eh. Remember only 2% of customers claim! PPI is a significant income for lenders that can accumulate millions, and I mean millions for doing nothing, absolutly nothing apart from sell it.

When you make a complaint and you suggest mis-selling, be prepared for a long battle. Insurers but mainly lenders who under the FSA rules are soley accountable for misselling (provided they are FSA approved in their own right) are fully accountable for sales issues and they are !!!! scared of screwing up. So if you have a decent complaint i.e like in my case where I attempted to cancel my PPI 18 months ago and I was told that I would not unless I took out a new agreement. Basically, I was told that as the premium was lent as part of the loan I could not cancel as the PPI was lent as a loan and therefore protected by the consumer credit act. As I have said I am a Claims person and through a friend I have since learnt that this is a load of !!!!!!!!. In 2005 as part of the TCF inititiave, Insurers agreed that they would cancel PPI and offer a pro-rata refund (used to be on what they called the rule of 78+2). Now, this is legitimate, they can do this HOWEVER, my policy document says I can cancel my policy at any time and in the event I do not settle my loan, the amount refunded will be credited to my loan agreement and my monthly payments will be recalculated. If your bank has said that you cannot cancel without taking out a new loan agreement, then, they are wrong and are not complying with the general practice which the FSA will definitely frown upon.

Anyway I have rambled on enough, if I can help anyone in particular with a claim then let me know, I will be happy to help where I can!

maisy wrote: »

I took my 1st loan out with natwest november 2003, i've since taken out 4 more loans, each to pay off the amount exsisting on the previous loan as well as paying for other things, all of which had PPI. I took my last one out october 2006 for £21000, I took it out over 7 years at £396 per month, in total I would be paying back £33,600!!! It was brought to my attention by a friend at work what a rip off PPI was. I was told about this site and after reading the article I realised I had been sold single premium policies with all of my loans. Although I was aware I was taking the PPI I had no idea how much it would add to the overall cost of the loan and I was mortified to find out I had been loaned the £21000 I needed plus the £6700 For the PPI!! This was not brought to my attention by the sales person therefore I feel I was missold. Also when I found out about all this I promptly went to my bank and cancelled the PPI, upped my repayments and shortened the length of the loan. One thing that bothered me was by this time I had paid 14 payments of £396 on my £21000 loan, a total of over £5500, but when i went to the bank they told me my total amount outstanding was £19750!! How can that be? Where has the other £4000 gone? Is it legal? I hate being ripped off and it annoys me that banks are getting away with this. Do i have a good case?

Kaia_2

Hi Gamekeeper....
LOL...that was a long one...!
Sorry , but that was an old post and since then I did get help to calaulate the figures.....
in the end this is what I came up with.....
PPi .....£2021.33
Interst paid on premium to date...£1832.49
Then added 8% stat interest (done on Martins calculator)....£999.92
Ended up with total as £4853.74
then added the £108 court fee to give a grand total of £4961.74
Kaia x

gamekeeperturnedpoacher

Hi just realised that, in another time zone I think! So were you succesful?

I have joined this forum as having worked in the PPI game for so long and seen first hand how customers are ripped off and the claims I turned down against desperate people, I would like to rectify that!!

Mark

YEOSAL

tiggrae wrote: »

hi the allocation questionaire is easy - just remember it's the court asking you where you want the case to be held and what Court track you want your case to go down - Small Claims, Multi or Fast Track - always go for the Small Claims Court even if it's over £5000. You won't be calling any expert witnesses so just leave that blank.

Also on your particulars, If I were you I'd pull the bit out about CPR 18 and send it to their solictors by serving it on them - I'd also request the following information from them

All procedures in place at the time of the Sale of the Policy to ensure they conform to good practice in the sale of PPI and your client is not guilty of the following poor practices as identified by the FSA:
· Controls in place to prevent the risk of inappropriate sales: around half of the firms failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that customers did not buy policies on which they could not claim or which provided only very limited cover;
· Controls in place for non-advised sales: about half of the firms selling on a non-advised basis did not have adequate systems to stop their staff giving advice or were providing information that amounted to giving advice;
· The systems in place to assess customer suitability for ppi product;
· There was an over-reliance on product documentation given to the customer at the expense of explaining the policy to the customer orally: most firms selling by telephone did not give sufficient information on exclusions;
· Procedures in respect to the quality and timeliness of product and price disclosure;
· The level and structure of inducements and Sales staff targets; and
· Training of sales staff, particularly the person who sold me the policy;
· Management Information regarding compliance monitoring. Any Internal Audit reports into the sale of PPI.

Hi

I am at the allocation questionnaire stage and have received AQ from Eversheds (solicitors for LLoyds TSB) which states in section G that they are saying that claim is time barred. Should I enter into section G the reason why it is not time barred?

Also, after reading the above post, should I send a letter requesting this list of information? Although LLoyds weren't with FSA until 2005 (my loan started 2000.) Surely they must have been regulated by GISC before that and similar principles would apply.

They have also ignored my requests for a copy of the PPI T&C and I have assumed that the PPI will be in both our names as was a joint loan and does not state anywhere it only covers one of us.

Am really desperate for info as I only have two days in which to respond!

Thanks x

marluc

YEOSAL wrote: »

Hi

I am at the allocation questionnaire stage and have received AQ from Eversheds (solicitors for LLoyds TSB) which states in section G that they are saying that claim is time barred. Should I enter into section G the reason why it is not time barred?

Also, after reading the above post, should I send a letter requesting this list of information? Although LLoyds weren't with FSA until 2005 (my loan started 2000.) Surely they must have been regulated by GISC before that and similar principles would apply.

They have also ignored my requests for a copy of the PPI T&C and I have assumed that the PPI will be in both our names as was a joint loan and does not state anywhere it only covers one of us.

Am really desperate for info as I only have two days in which to respond!

Thanks x

Hi Yeosal
I don't know your original details, but I am a few weeks ahead of you (check my posts above). Re: FF solicitors.
I would do as Tiggrae suggests. Freedom Finance were't regulated by FSA in 2003 when we took out our loan. But as you can see the solicitors wrote back with vague statements.
They will have to send you a copy of the T&C. Did you include £10 and did you send it registered mail? Keep all copies of letters that you have sent as these will be needed in court.
Why are they saying that it is time barred? Sorry can't find it on here.
Also, we took out a joint loan, but the PPI was only for me, which seems very strange. Anyway, good luck. If you need anymore help, advise I'm sure lots of the really helpful and knowledgeable people on here will do so.
Don't worry!!!!!

Kaia_2

Hi Marluc....Hi Yeosal.....
Yes, same here Loan 2002 , before the "FSA" regs.
And also loan in joint names but with "single Plus cover"...meaning 1 fully covered and 1 for life only.

These companies cant hide behind the fact that the FSA regs came into place in 2005. Its a weak excuse...there was FISA before FSA .

I wrote an e-mail to FISA asking if Freedom Finance were reglated by them in 2002 and here is the reply....see the link to code of practice below!

I can confirm that Freedom Finance plc were FISA members in 2002 and
continued to be so until there resignation in 2006.

Yours sincerely
Clive H Edwards
Compliance

---

Original Message

---

From: FISA Web Site [mailto:noreply@fisa.co.uk]
Sent: 09 May 2008 21:33
To: [EMAIL="audra@fisa.co.uk"]audra@fisa.co.uk[/EMAIL]
Subject: Web Site Question

---

I have copied an extract from the FISA website........

FISA was established in 1988 as a joint initiative of brokers and lenders in the secured loan (or second mortgage) sector to enhance standards in the industry.
FISA currently has eight lenders and about 356 broker members. All are required to comply with the FISA Code of Practice. FISA members transact about 80% of broker introduced secured loans in the UK. The sector has an estimated annual turnover of £6bn.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Principal activities[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]FISA's activities are directed towards helping members comply with Consumer Credit Act and Financial Services Authority (in respect of insurance sales) regulations as well as the FISA Code.[/FONT]
See link here for CODES OF PRCTICE...
http://www.fisa.co.uk/download/document/FISA%20-%20Codes%20of%20Discipline.pdf
Basically FSA and FISA are the same.....
We were still covered pre 2005, just under a different name.

Kaia_2

Just came across this in a search........would this ACT have covered us as well????
The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) provides the statutory framework for the new UK market abuse regime, which became effective on 1 December 2001. The FSMA market abuse regime provides new powers to the Financial Services Authority (FSA) to sanction anyone who engages in 'market abuse', that is misuse of information, misleading practices, and market manipulation, relating to investments traded on prescribed UK markets. It also applies to those who require or encourage others to engage in conduct that would amount to market abuse. FSMA's stated objective is to fill the 'regulatory gap' by giving the FSA substantial powers to punish unregulated market participants whose market conduct falls below acceptable standards, but does not rise to the level of a criminal offence. This paper analyses the major features of both the UK insider dealing legislation contained in Part V of the Criminal Justice 1993, the FSMA market abuse regime contained in section 118 of the Act, and the proposed European Union Directive on Market Abuse that represents a significant level of convergence in European securities regulation. The paper argues that an efficient price discovery process for securities markets can be facilitated only by a comprehensive regulatory regime that provides substantive standards and rules that ensure high standards of transparency and disclosure through effective enforcement. An amended version of this Working Paper appears Rider, B., Alexander, K. and Linklater, L. (2002) Market Abuse and Insider Dealing, Butterworth.

This states as FACT that market abuse was going on at that time.
This states that it could punish "unregulated" participants.

Kaia_2

gamekeeperturnedpoacher wrote: »

Hi just realised that, in another time zone I think! So were you succesful?

I have joined this forum as having worked in the PPI game for so long and seen first hand how customers are ripped off and the claims I turned down against desperate people, I would like to rectify that!!

Mark

I am at the stage where I have sent off all the letters to Freedom and they have refused to uphold my complaint.
I issued a claim at my local court on 10th May and they have until the 26th May to respond.
I have a copy of my CCA and some are telling me it may be flawed as it does not show a Total Charge for credit/ or any broker fees/ comissions etc.
What are your thoughts on this???

(SAR request has been sent off last week by Registered post so they have another 30 odd days to reply to that).
I am thinking of seeking help as I dont know if i would be confident representing myself.

Marluc, is just a step ahead of me and has had a response from Freedoms solicitors (post on top of this page).

YEOSAL

marluc wrote: »

Hi everyone. I haven't been on here for a few days I have been so busy at work and at home.
I have received a letter from FF solicitor's stating that CPR 18 does not apply to Small Claims (CPR Rule 27.2)
But with a view to narrowing the issues in dispute they have responded to my request for more info.
To sum up they state:

• that FF policy - to provide clear + comprehensive documentation to ensure customers are fully aware of their options.
• FF always operated on a non-advised sale. FF forwarded all enquiries to their underwriting department.
• All FF customer facing employees undertake initial induction programme specific to their role. Underwriters + advisors undertake lender traing with ongoing product testing to maintain competence.
• I had the mandatory consideration period to enable me to make an informed choice. I signed the credit agreement, FF understood that I had read all documentation and were happy to proceed.
• FF does not retain data with regard to internal audits prior to FSA regulation of FF

The letter then states that i have made 8 heads of claim against FF which are without merit.

Does this mean that they are telling me I won't win?????

Also included was a separate letter Without prejudice save as to costs
in which they offer me £1000 in full and final payment subject to entering into standard confidentiality agreement. I have until May 23rd to respond

Does this mean that they think I will win?????

If anyone has any ideas about whether I should reply to this letter, or whether I should go and see a solicitor or what? I'd be very grateful for any advice. Thanks in advance.

How much is your claim for? If they are offering to settle, you may be able to negotiate for some more. Have a look on the success thread to see if anyone else has had this happen to them?

Changing the subject, when you sent a letter to solicitors re: cpr 18.1, did you word it exactly the same as what was written on the post? I am going to request the information without using cpr 18.1 to see how they respond.

Thanks for your help!
Sally

YEOSAL

Kaia wrote: »

Hi Marluc....Hi Yeosal.....
Yes, same here Loan 2002 , before the "FSA" regs.
And also loan in joint names but with "single Plus cover"...meaning 1 fully covered and 1 for life only.

These companies cant hide behind the fact that the FSA regs came into place in 2005. Its a weak excuse...there was FISA before FSA .

I wrote an e-mail to FISA asking if Freedom Finance were reglated by them in 2002 and here is the reply....see the link to code of practice below!

I can confirm that Freedom Finance plc were FISA members in 2002 and
continued to be so until there resignation in 2006.

Yours sincerely
Clive H Edwards
Compliance

---

Original Message

---

From: FISA Web Site [mailto:noreply@fisa.co.uk]
Sent: 09 May 2008 21:33
To: [EMAIL="audra@fisa.co.uk"]audra@fisa.co.uk[/EMAIL]
Subject: Web Site Question

---

I have copied an extract from the FISA website........

FISA was established in 1988 as a joint initiative of brokers and lenders in the secured loan (or second mortgage) sector to enhance standards in the industry.
FISA currently has eight lenders and about 356 broker members. All are required to comply with the FISA Code of Practice. FISA members transact about 80% of broker introduced secured loans in the UK. The sector has an estimated annual turnover of £6bn.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Principal activities[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]FISA's activities are directed towards helping members comply with Consumer Credit Act and Financial Services Authority (in respect of insurance sales) regulations as well as the FISA Code.[/FONT]
See link here for CODES OF PRCTICE...
http://www.fisa.co.uk/download/document/FISA%20-%20Codes%20of%20Discipline.pdf
Basically FSA and FISA are the same.....
We were still covered pre 2005, just under a different name.

Hi, you have been busy!

In the defence from LLoyds solicitors it quotes;
"The Defendant denies any claim in negligent misrepresentation and/or a claim for breach of the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 and breach of the Misrepresentation Act 1967"

So the FSMA does apply, news to me as my POC included only the Misrep Act so I will now be using stuff from FSMA too in my claim.

Did the FISA have a list of who they regulated prior to 2005?

Sally