PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

marshallka

Is this the GISC code of practice for anyone making a claim if the company was a member of the GISC before the FSA took over??? Or is this the ABI??

http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/default.asp?Menu_ID=946&Menu_All=1,946,0&Child_ID=115

http://www.middletonpotts.co.uk/library/default.asp?p=92&c=101

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I think this is the GISC code of practice for anyone making a claim if the company was a member of the GISC before the FSA took over

http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/default.asp?Menu_ID=946&Menu_All=1,946,0&Child_ID=115

Hun just read your above post too, I know you have waited long enough already but i would ring the FOS again tomorrow to tell them you waited for a call both last Thurs and Fri because you assumed someone would get back to you about this matter and you heard nothing, they then may decide to look into this deeper for you there and then and maybe they will finally tell you.;)

Maybe worth a shot hun.;)

Good link above too, thx.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Hun just read your above post too, I know you have waited long enough already but i would ring the FOS again tomorrow to tell them you waited for a call both last Thurs and Fri because you assumed someone would get back to you about this matter and you heard nothing, they then may decide to look into this deeper for you there and then and maybe they will finally tell you.;)

Maybe worth a shot hun.;)

Good link above too, thx.

Di, i had put it in as Tiggrae suggested ages ago in that Barclays were under the FSA so i put trading as. I just want to know one way or another and its not the time limit, its the not knowing if they can take a look and whether its something that would be in jurisdiction. I really want to understand what I am telling other on here in that GISC means the selling of insurance but if you are going for unfair rebate then its the date they came under the FSA being after 14th January 2005. If i understood more of these two different compaints selling/unfair rebate i would feel better at advising on here. I know that my GISC thing did not come into my complaint for unfair settlement with the last complaint so i assume unfair settlement/rebate comes under the FSA rules and nothing to do with the General Insurance Standards Council. I just want to learn.

If GISC members does have anything to do with unfair rebates then my last complaint probably would have been looked at and they made a mistake and caused me more work. I doubt they have though but its playing on my mind here. You should be ok as your unfair rebate was november 2005 so its the date after the FSA took over.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Di, i had put it in as Tiggrae suggested ages ago in that Barclays were under the FSA so i put trading as. I just want to know one way or another and its not the time limit, its the not knowing if they can take a look and whether its something that would be in jurisdiction. I really want to understand what I am telling other on here in that GISC means the selling of insurance but if you are going for unfair rebate then its the date they came under the FSA being after 14th January 2005. If i understood more of these two different compaints selling/unfair rebate i would feel better at advising on here. I know that my GISC thing did not come into my complaint for unfair settlement with the last complaint so i assume unfair settlement/rebate comes under the FSA rules and nothing to do with the General Insurance Standards Council. I just want to learn.

Yes I know what you mean, knowing one way or another would help.

I remember when the FOS sent back my Endeavour mis selling complaint, we had made a phone call to the FOS to ask if they would know if "End" were covered by GISC, instantly he said unfortunately no..... .
We just wanted to make sure in case anything was missed.

I will also be mad if this complaint they said that may be looked at was sent back to me again the 2nd time after going through weeks of waiting for the letter we received.
When opening that letter, I could not believe I was reading it right and even got hubby to read it to me just to make sure, so this was a relief.
So fingers crossed this will not be turned away the 2nd time.;)


The way I see it GISC are there for a reason and if there were no FSA until Jan 2005 the same rules should apply !!!
Shame this was a voluntary thing........

marshallka

How does this read to you



Insurance and ReinsuranceAugust 2001Regulation of dealings with insurance intermediaries
[FONT=Helvetica, Arial][/FONT]

New General Insurance Watchdog - The General Insurance Standards Council ("GISC")


The new watchdog for the general insurance industry, the General Insurance Standards Council (GISC) regulates the sales, advisory and service standards of Members (insurers, intermediaries - including brokers, agents, and anyone acting for them).
The Insurance Brokers Registration Act 1977 has been repealed with effect from 30th April 2001. The Insurance Brokers Registration Council (IBRC) has been dissolved and its former members are invited to join the GISC. Although membership of the GISC is optional at the present time, the GISC has confirmed that most of the former members of the IBRC have now registered with the GISC, together with most of the major insurers.
The GISC has put in place two Codes of Practice, a Private Customer Code and a Commercial Code to promote standards of professional conduct for its members.
To ensure that these standards of professional conduct are delivered and maintained GISC Members are required to comply with the GISC rules.

New Regulatory Provision (Rule 42) Governing Dealings with Intermediaries


The GISC intends to create a single coherent regulatory system for the general insurance industry to replace the current unsatisfactory mix of codes, statues and byelaws.
Currently, Members of the GISC are unrestricted in the categories of person with or through whom they may do business.
As far as dealings with intermediaries are concerned, the broad effect of Rule 42, once implemented, will be that Members of the GISC and their appointed agents and sub-agents will be precluded from carrying out General Insurance Activities with an Intermediary unless the Intermediary is a Member of the GISC.
Rule 42 was due to come into force towards the end of this year but the need to obtain certain regulatory clearances means that implementation will be later than anticipated.

General Insurance Activities means regulated activities which are defined as one or more of:

1. Selling
2. Advising
3. Broking (including producing and placing)
4. Any other activity which, when carried on in connection with a General Insurance Product, is regulated by the Codes (Private Customer or Commercial)

An intermediary is defined as anyone who engages in General Insurance Activities who is not:

1. An Insurer
2. An Appointed Agent or Appointed Sub-Agent
3. An Introducer
4. A Service Provider; or
5. An Outsourcing Provider

General Insurance means those classes of business listed in Schedule 2 to the Insurance Companies Act 1982 (i.e. virtually everything except life assurance and pensions).
Need for Action


Although Rule 42 will not come into force until the regulatory clearances have been granted and there are currently various transitional arrangements in place, GISC members are asked by GISC to review their relationships to ensure that they will not be dealing with any Intermediaries in breach of Rule 42 once it is implemented.

For those who are not currently members of the GISC but who wish to commence or carry on business as an intermediary dealing with members of the GISC, it is important to bear in mind that registration with the GISC is likely to become an absolute necessity in the not too distant future.




Does this read that any member of the GISC can only deal with other members of the GISC too in the selling of insurance or am i right off track and very tired.

marshallka

Just found this too.


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]transitional arrangements for insurance intermediaries[/FONT]

In issue 42 of ombudsman news, we noted that our jurisdiction has recently expanded to include insurance intermediaries. This article outlines the insurance intermediary activities that are now covered by the Financial Ombudsman Service. It also explains the arrangements for dealing with relevant transitional complaints – those that concern events that occurred before insurance intermediaries joined our jurisdiction.

firms within our jurisdiction
From 14 January 2005, the following activities became regulated by the Financial Services Authority (and therefore fell within our jurisdiction):

dealing in insurance contracts as agent

arranging deals in insurance contracts

advising on insurance contracts

assisting in the administration and performance of insurance contracts.
This means that many firms which carried out such activities and were previously outside our jurisdiction – such as insurance brokers – are now covered by the ombudsman scheme. We also have jurisdiction over firms that have been granted interim permission by the Financial Services Authority to carry out general insurance mediation activities.
There are a few specific exceptions to this extension of our jurisdiction:

travel agencies – when the insurance is sold as part of a package holiday

retailers – when selling extended warranties on some goods, such as refrigerators and televisions

loss adjusters – but not loss assessors who act for customers in relation to insurance claims; and

the handling of insurance claims on behalf of insurers under a delegated authority.
retrospective jurisdiction
As well as having jurisdiction over complaints about events occurring on or after 14 January 2005, the Financial Ombudsman Service also has a limited ‘retrospective’ jurisdiction. This covers some complaints about events that occurred before 14 January 2005. The retrospective jurisdiction comes about because of provisions set out in a statutory instrument informally known as The Mortgage & General Insurance Transitional Order. The Order allows us to look at complaints about intermediary activities that occurred before 14 January 2005 if:

the firm was a member of the General Insurance Standards Council at the time of the event complained about

the complaint would previously have been covered by the General Insurance Standards Council Dispute Resolution Facility

the complainant is an individual who is acting otherwise than solely for the purposes of his business; and

the firm became regulated by the Financial Services Authority on or after 14 January 2005.
Such complaints are known as relevant transitional complaints. While we will determine them in line with our ‘fair and reasonable’ jurisdiction, we must also take into account what the General Insurance Standards Council might have decided. We will not have jurisdiction over any complaints that the Council was already handling before 14 January 2005. Our usual time limits will apply.
In a future issue of ombudsman news we will include case studies illustrating some of the jurisdiction issues surrounding transitional arrangements for intermediaries. In the meantime the following flow chart should help to clarify which retrospective complaints we are able to look at.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

How does this read to you



Insurance and ReinsuranceAugust 2001Regulation of dealings with insurance intermediaries


New General Insurance Watchdog - The General Insurance Standards Council ("GISC")


The new watchdog for the general insurance industry, the General Insurance Standards Council (GISC) regulates the sales, advisory and service standards of Members (insurers, intermediaries - including brokers, agents, and anyone acting for them).
The Insurance Brokers Registration Act 1977 has been repealed with effect from 30th April 2001. The Insurance Brokers Registration Council (IBRC) has been dissolved and its former members are invited to join the GISC. Although membership of the GISC is optional at the present time, the GISC has confirmed that most of the former members of the IBRC have now registered with the GISC, together with most of the major insurers.
The GISC has put in place two Codes of Practice, a Private Customer Code and a Commercial Code to promote standards of professional conduct for its members.
To ensure that these standards of professional conduct are delivered and maintained GISC Members are required to comply with the GISC rules.

New Regulatory Provision (Rule 42) Governing Dealings with Intermediaries


The GISC intends to create a single coherent regulatory system for the general insurance industry to replace the current unsatisfactory mix of codes, statues and byelaws.
Currently, Members of the GISC are unrestricted in the categories of person with or through whom they may do business.
As far as dealings with intermediaries are concerned, the broad effect of Rule 42, once implemented, will be that Members of the GISC and their appointed agents and sub-agents will be precluded from carrying out General Insurance Activities with an Intermediary unless the Intermediary is a Member of the GISC.
Rule 42 was due to come into force towards the end of this year but the need to obtain certain regulatory clearances means that implementation will be later than anticipated.

General Insurance Activities means regulated activities which are defined as one or more of:

1. Selling
2. Advising
3. Broking (including producing and placing)
4. Any other activity which, when carried on in connection with a General Insurance Product, is regulated by the Codes (Private Customer or Commercial)

An intermediary is defined as anyone who engages in General Insurance Activities who is not:

1. An Insurer
2. An Appointed Agent or Appointed Sub-Agent
3. An Introducer
4. A Service Provider; or
5. An Outsourcing Provider

General Insurance means those classes of business listed in Schedule 2 to the Insurance Companies Act 1982 (i.e. virtually everything except life assurance and pensions).
Need for Action


Although Rule 42 will not come into force until the regulatory clearances have been granted and there are currently various transitional arrangements in place, GISC members are asked by GISC to review their relationships to ensure that they will not be dealing with any Intermediaries in breach of Rule 42 once it is implemented.

For those who are not currently members of the GISC but who wish to commence or carry on business as an intermediary dealing with members of the GISC, it is important to bear in mind that registration with the GISC is likely to become an absolute necessity in the not too distant future.




Does this read that any member of the GISC can only deal with other members of the GISC too in the selling of insurance or am i right off track and very tired.

Hun going by this I would say if this is the case this should be treated like the FSA whereas any complaints in the above should be looked at by the FOS.

I will re-read this again hun but I stick with what I say.;)

(OMG, my budgie have just died)......:eek:

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Just found this too.


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]transitional arrangements for insurance intermediaries[/FONT]

In issue 42 of ombudsman news, we noted that our jurisdiction has recently expanded to include insurance intermediaries. This article outlines the insurance intermediary activities that are now covered by the Financial Ombudsman Service. It also explains the arrangements for dealing with relevant transitional complaints – those that concern events that occurred before insurance intermediaries joined our jurisdiction.

firms within our jurisdiction
From 14 January 2005, the following activities became regulated by the Financial Services Authority (and therefore fell within our jurisdiction):

dealing in insurance contracts as agent

arranging deals in insurance contracts

advising on insurance contracts

assisting in the administration and performance of insurance contracts.
This means that many firms which carried out such activities and were previously outside our jurisdiction – such as insurance brokers – are now covered by the ombudsman scheme. We also have jurisdiction over firms that have been granted interim permission by the Financial Services Authority to carry out general insurance mediation activities.
There are a few specific exceptions to this extension of our jurisdiction:

travel agencies – when the insurance is sold as part of a package holiday

retailers – when selling extended warranties on some goods, such as refrigerators and televisions

loss adjusters – but not loss assessors who act for customers in relation to insurance claims; and

the handling of insurance claims on behalf of insurers under a delegated authority.
retrospective jurisdiction
As well as having jurisdiction over complaints about events occurring on or after 14 January 2005, the Financial Ombudsman Service also has a limited ‘retrospective’ jurisdiction. This covers some complaints about events that occurred before 14 January 2005. The retrospective jurisdiction comes about because of provisions set out in a statutory instrument informally known as The Mortgage & General Insurance Transitional Order. The Order allows us to look at complaints about intermediary activities that occurred before 14 January 2005 if:

the firm was a member of the General Insurance Standards Council at the time of the event complained about

the complaint would previously have been covered by the General Insurance Standards Council Dispute Resolution Facility

the complainant is an individual who is acting otherwise than solely for the purposes of his business; and

the firm became regulated by the Financial Services Authority on or after 14 January 2005.
Such complaints are known as relevant transitional complaints. While we will determine them in line with our ‘fair and reasonable’ jurisdiction, we must also take into account what the General Insurance Standards Council might have decided. We will not have jurisdiction over any complaints that the Council was already handling before 14 January 2005. Our usual time limits will apply.
In a future issue of ombudsman news we will include case studies illustrating some of the jurisdiction issues surrounding transitional arrangements for intermediaries. In the meantime the following flow chart should help to clarify which retrospective complaints we are able to look at.

This to me clarifies this hun and I were you I would print this off and add this if you have to - to make your point.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

This to me clarifies this hun and I were you I would print this off and add this if you have to - to make your point.

No Di it does not if you see what i mean. Our complaints for unfair rebates are not against the insurance intermediaries, they are against the lenders.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

No Di it does not if you see what i mean. Our complaints for unfair rebates are not against the insurance intermediaries, they are against the lenders.

Yes hun a different issue altogether, but surely the GISC should work like the FSA, but then the FSA do not really mention anything about unfair rebates do they ? Damn its confusing isn't it hun ?