PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

marshallka

There is good website here about Better Regulation..

http://www.betterregulation.gov.uk/search/


http://www.betterregulation.gov.uk/
Perhaps we could all put our ideas forward??

di3004

Hi there ........;)

my dad-in-law rushed into hospital early hours, I will be here but back and forth, then I will have to get deciding what to do here about this Company........:mad: .
You lot have been wonderful.......:A :A , thank you and poor Marshallka, bless her :beer: .

marshallka

Another good site here for you Di

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/index.htm

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Hi there ........;)

my dad-in-law rushed into hospital early hours, I will be here but back and forth, then I will have to get deciding what to do here about this Company........:mad: .
You lot have been wonderful.......:A :A , thank you and poor Marshallka, bless her :beer: .

Ok Di, lets hope he is ok. Nothing serious i hope:eek:

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Ok Di, lets hope he is ok. Nothing serious i hope:eek:

Thanks hun.;)

Its chest problems again, and has been suffering on and off for years since his lungs collapsed, and he's prone to phneumonia..... , will know more shortly I hope.;)

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Another good site here for you Di

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/index.htm

Thanks for this hun.

Funny thing, we have had lots to do with the above since early this year, when my hubby's steelplant went into receivership, these were the ones dealing with the money side of things.

In fact another letter came through the post yesterday, but interesting, thanks hun.;)

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

What are you going to do now Di.??

Is there any way you can find out about this "leave to court". Perhaps the liquidators might know.. I don't know or companies house etc. I would ring around and see what you can find out here. Tiggrae may be on later so hopefully she will have some suggestions.:D

I have checked the register at companies house for disqualified directors and they are not on it.

Info here
http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/guidanceleaflets/cddadd/cddadd.htm

Have you ever tried to make a claim from the liquidators?? I would ask them again if they have info of your account perhaps... Tell them they should have as its less than 6 years ago.

Yes hun, we had wrote/emailed/spoke to see if we can claim for anything and their answer was no...... , will see if I also still have the email from them, if I find it I will add it here.

Here it is, the reply from the liquidators:


Dear

I refer to your emails addressed to Bartfields, which have been forwarded to me.

Since November 2007, the Insolvency Division of Bartfields (UK) Limited was sold to Begbies Traynor and my new details are

Begbies Traynor
Glendevon House
Hawthorn Park
Coal Road
LEEDS LS14 1PQ

Email: [EMAIL="gerald.krasner@begbies-traynor.com"]gerald.krasner@begbies-traynor.com[/EMAIL]

With reference to your enquiry on click Finance Limited, my administration as liquidator was concluded on 16 March 2006, and the company was then dissolved. In the circumstances, there is nothing further I can do to assist you, but I trust the contents of this email are sufficient for your purposes.

Kindly confirm

GERALD M KRASNER
Licensed Insolvency Practitioner
Begbies Traynor
Glendevon House

di3004

Here was the last email I sent 14 July 2008 below the reply of their's above:

D

Click Finance Limited was closed on 16 March 2006 and therefore, all the papers have now been destroyed, so will be unable to obtain this information for you.


From:
Sent: 14 July 2008 17:01
To:
Subject:


Due to a lot of confusion with the Click companies, I am receiving some advice but am very sorry to email and cause any inconvenience in this matter regarding Click Financial.

Companies search there are so many, where the company we were with was that in Farnham, Surrey.

I have added the registration number below.



Please could you confirm the firm company registration number of the actual Click who has dissolved in 2006, as there are many groups of these in finance, but a reg number is needed for my advice I'm receiving, thank you.



The number I have on my documents are that of 04239176.

I look forward to hearing from you.





Kindest Regards

tiggrae

zeblet wrote: »

I have amended POC to the following :


Claim No: ***********


IN THE LOWESTOFT COUNTY COURT

BETWEEN: -

******************
and

LLOYDS TSB BANK PLC



_________________________________
PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
________________________________



1. The Claimant opened a Consumer Credit Agreements with Lloyds TSB Bank PLC on ***** The account number is *******, which was a credit agreement with a total of £***** . I will refer to this as the “Agreement”.


2. The Agreement included Payment Protection Insurance (“PPI”) which was taken out at the same time.


3. The Claimant contends that the PPI relating to the Agreement, was only purchased as a result of pressure and misleading andr incorrect advice given by the “the Manager” employed by Lloyds TSB Bank PLC.

4. The Office of Fair Trading states that “PPI protects borrowers' ability to maintain repayments and should help them avoid getting into debt should they be unable to keep up their repayments due to accident, sickness or unemployment.” The Claimant contends that the PPI sold in relation to the Agreement was never capable of meeting those requirements, and that both policies were missold.


5. The Claimant contends that the PPI relating to the Agreement was not suitable for purpose because the claimant was on long term sick leave at the time of signing the document and informed the member of staff at that time but was not informed that any pre-existing illness would not be covered by the policy. Also the claimant had previously suffered depression due to the loss of several very close relatives of which the staff member was aware and was not informed the policy did not cover such a condition.


6. The Claimant believes that a reasonable level of care and skill was not offered to the Claimant by the Manager during the sales process, and that therefore [the company] failed to meet its obligations under the terms of section 13 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.


7. The Claimant believes it is inconceivable that a person, occupying a management position within a multi-national company specialising in personal finance, would not have been given full training in the eligibility requirements for a product that provides a considerable boost to its profitability through commission and interest.


8. On the basis of this, and further contentions outlined below, the Claimant believes that the advice given by the Manager was in fact fraudulent, and therefore a breach of common law, in that the representation of the product’s suitability was either made (1) knowingly, or (2) without belief in its truth, or (3) recklessly, careless whether it be true or false. I refer the court to the judgement given by Lord Herschell (Derry v Peak (1889) 14 App Cas 337).


9. The Claimant contends that the Manager was made fully aware of the employment positionandpre-existing conditionof the Claimant, and should have had the necessary training and experience to know that the policy was not suitable.


10. The Claimant also contends that there should have been a system of supervision and checking in place to ensure that such errors, omissions and misrepresentations were noticed, and corrective action taken, and if there was no such system in place, then that should also be considered as a failure of Lloyds TSB bank PLC, to meet its obligations under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982.


11. The Claimant contends that it was never explained that the PPI would attract interest.

12. Notwithstanding that the forms were signed, and in any respect, the Claimant contends that there was an entitlement to expect that the advice and information given was true and honest, and that a reasonable level of care and skill would be given to ensure that the best interests of the customer were being met.



13. In considering this, and all matters in this claim, the Claimant asks the court to take into account the following Principles of Business which are legally binding on Lloyds TSB Bank PLC, under the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000, and are contained in the FSA Handbook:

Principle 1 Integrity - A firm must conduct its business with integrity.


Principle 2 Skill, care and diligence - A firm must conduct its business with due skill, care and diligence.


Principle 3 Management and control - A firm must take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk management systems.


Principle 5 Market conduct - A firm must observe proper standards of market conduct.


Principle 6 Customers' interests - A firm must pay due regard to the interests of its customers and treat them fairly.


Principle 7 Communications with clients - A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading.


Principle 8 Conflicts of interest - A firm must manage conflicts of interest fairly, both between itself and its customers and between a customer and another client.


Principle 9 Customers: relationships of trust - A firm must take reasonable care to ensure the suitability of its advice and discretionary decisions for any customer who is entitled to rely upon its judgmen




14. The Claimant seeks damages and other sums, as listed below, against the Defendant under Common Law, and/or section 2 of the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

Refund of PPI premiums paid £***** plus contractual interest.




The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true.


Signed:


Date:


Please would you advise if this now ok. Thanks so much. I have to take it to court by 4 pm today. Thursday

yes that looks fine - there are a few typos but I'm sure your spell checker will sort those out - good luck and keep us informed - you have to be careful when making a claim through the court as a slip up in the court procedure could mean your claim being struck out

marshallka

:j Been assigned an adjudicator for my Co-op claim and apparently the other loans too may be ok to put into question. He did say that he requested info from Co-op and they have not replied to him. He says that is unusual in that they usually comply with this but he has sent them a nudge again. I just hope i win now. (you have to think positive)

How long after this stage is the complaint sorted now. I know i advise on this forum but no idea how long it all takes from the actual adjudicator.