PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

catinthehat1

marshallka wrote: »

What do you teach catinthehat, or can i not ask???

I hope its not english when you look at my posts.

No - primary school children - so don't worry, not English per se!!!:rotfl:

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

If it does not say final response then you need to write back and perhaps !!! a bit more. I think sometimes this tactic is a delaying thing in that they get to keep the money a little longer. Just write again and then wait for their final and then take it to the FOS. Good luck

Yes maybe it would be better to do it this way, even though I think I had read they had already had over 8 weeks to investigate this first one, so if I was Sparky I would only give them 14 days on this letter meanings they already had over the requested time on the first letter, do you think 14 days is ample time for them 2nd time round hun, or 28 days ?

I don't want to confuse anyone here......:o

marshallka

catinthehat1 wrote: »

I thought that - bit odd - maybe they have TOO much time on their hands!!!! WHY, oh! why - am I so addicted to this site????????? - do you think there are more women on here than men????? We are all on a mission - (I'm not being sexist - sorry men!!):o

I call mine an "illness".:eek:

di3004

Tron_ess wrote: »

Evening all,

Not have long but will fire what I can.

Starting with the "unable to hold client money":

You'll find that most small intermediary lenders and brokers will have this, It basically means that they are not allowed to hold customer desposits in designated accounts. The regulations for holding client money are onerous indeed, and normally require companies to hold increased Capital. There really is nothing suspicious about this and is very normal practice for smaller firms.

OMG Tron_ess aint we glad to see you.........:D , when you have 5, I received a response from that Click financial today, it may be a few pages off now, so any suggestions of yours will also be a great help, thanks.

Di.

catinthehat1

Tron_ess wrote: »

Evening all,

Not have long but will fire what I can.

Starting with the "unable to hold client money":

You'll find that most small intermediary lenders and brokers will have this, It basically means that they are not allowed to hold customer desposits in designated accounts. The regulations for holding client money are onerous indeed, and normally require companies to hold increased Capital. There really is nothing suspicious about this and is very normal practice for smaller firms.

Thanks Tron_ess - It's all this jargon - why don't you compile Tron_ess's guide to jargon busting!!!! Instead of 'Dangerous book for boys' - You could name it 'People Power to (busting) Insurance' or PPI for short - sorry long day with little people - it rubs off!!!!:rotfl:

marshallka

Tron_ess wrote: »

Evening all,

Not have long but will fire what I can.

Starting with the "unable to hold client money":

You'll find that most small intermediary lenders and brokers will have this, It basically means that they are not allowed to hold customer desposits in designated accounts. The regulations for holding client money are onerous indeed, and normally require companies to hold increased Capital. There really is nothing suspicious about this and is very normal practice for smaller firms.

Read about this click business Tron_ess, Its doing our heads in here. Been digging all day and its back breaking.

di3004

Tron_ess in case you miss this I hope you don't mind but I will add that Click reply here also:

Dear

I refer to your recent email regarding your complaint against Click Finance Ltd and recap our previous correspondence. The company has been wound-up and we referred you to the liquidators with regard to your claim. We have been instructed by the Liquidator to take this action whenever there is a query concerning Click Finance Limited as we no longer have any legal capacity in that company and are therefore not able to make any settlement offers on its behalf.

You now appear to be asking Click Financial Ltd to settle a complaint on behalf of another company for which it holds no liability. I am sure that you will appreciate that such an action by management would be unfair on the shareholders of Click Financial Limited and improper.

I would additionally state, however, that Click Finance Limited has never had to settle or recompense a customer for miss-selling and we have no evidence that it miss-sold in this circumstance. Your claim is that you have been miss-sold a Payment Protection Insurance policy but according to the copy letters you have provided, this policy was sold to you in 2004 and you redeemed the associated loan in 2005. We are therefore unable to understand why you did not make a complaint at that time and have waited for almost three years before raising this issue.

I have noted your comments about Click Financial Ltd being a phoenix company and would respectfully point out that you are mistaken in this assumption. The company was actually incorporated before Click Finance Ltd and has always traded in its own right.

My understanding is that Click Finance Ltd was not a member of the GISC.

Regarding the query you raised, any correspondence with Mr Teague should be addressed to this office. I appreciate that this email is not the response you would have liked but nevertheless we feel this is the correct response given the circumstances

Yours sincerely

money_back_3

hi all
I took out a loan for £2500 with hfc in 2001 via one of their branches i remeber the sales man being very pushy it was mend to pay off another loan i had with them quicker and with not as much interest. anyway how wrong was i, still paying for it now, its like a ongoing loan with the interest and ppi. i was only paying off about £4 a month from the loan. i stopped the ppi and the interest in 2004 when i got in debt with all my other bills.

Does any one think the ppi is worth claiming back on the grounds of pushy and as hfc have been fined.

i have all the paperwork which is all computer printed expet my signature

Tron_ess

di3004 wrote: »

I'm at a loose end here with Click really I think, and if they are completely different companies altogether then I may as well lie back on this one, but if there was any possible chance of reclaiming this then all the better.

I only received underwriting work and the rest of it was the lenders paperwork Endeavour.

Why does the numbers 311 can't remember the rest of it come into my head, or would this be part of the FSA reg number for the existing Click perhaps ?:rolleyes:

Hi Di
Tiggrae was correct in previous post. Unfortunetely is looks like they've been very clever.
Click Financial Limited (still trading) was actually opened before Click Finance Limited. (dissolved)
This rules out any offence under the Insolvency Act re using similar name. I'm not however convinced that the Liquidators/Receivers do not have information. I'd have to trawl but can't imagine they could destroy records within 2 years, as normally anything relating to such things is minimum 3 years and more than likely 6 years.
Tiggrae mentioned getting details of the professional indemnity insurance - that's what you need to go after if possible.
Other possibility is to get shareholder and director details of the dissolved company. Only people that would have this are liquidators (or possibly companies house). Then compare to existing business - and if the links are as expected ... i'd say press could be an option.

di3004

money_back wrote: »

hi all
I took out a loan for £2500 with hfc in 2001 via one of their branches i remeber the sales man being very pushy it was mend to pay off another loan i had with them quicker and with not as much interest. anyway how wrong was i, still paying for it now, its like a ongoing loan with the interest and ppi. i was only paying off about £4 a month from the loan. i stopped the ppi and the interest in 2004 when i got in debt with all my other bills.

Does any one think the ppi is worth claiming back on the grounds of pushy and as hfc have been fined.

i have all the paperwork which is all computer printed expet my signature

The hfc were also fined for mis selling, not sure if you are aware of this or not and I do think these were covered/regulated when you had taken out this policy.

You have every right to reclaim on what you feel you were mis sold on and if there is anything else you can think of to add the stronger the letter will be for your case.

Was this a single up front ppi cover topped in with your loan ?
Did they tell you that there would be extra interest on this ?

There are all sorts of reasons of why people are mis sold, maybe you would not have been eligible for it anyway.

I would try and reclaim this on the grounds of being mis sold.

There is a template on this site, if you cannot find it give us a shout, one of us will get back with it as soon as we can.;)

Di.
x