PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Me too would go crazy :mad: !!!
I think its a total waste of time meanings they are all of the same account with the same complaints, no wonder these complaints take forever to get through, afterall same bank/account number, in my opinion should all be treated as one single complaint.:rolleyes:

It may be something to do with the money they get from the firm if a complaint is made against them. I think the first 3 are free and then each one after is £360. I suppose if four loans are one complaint then the FOS gets stung for £1080. Am i perhaps way off here:rolleyes:

Currently more than 70% of the ombudsman service’s funding comes from the fees which it charges firms for considering complaints (usually £360 – the first two cases per firm per year not being charged for). The remaining funding comes from annual fees payable by all firms, calculated according to their role in the different industry sectors they are involved in.

marshallka

pinknico wrote: »

In regards to mis sold PPI go straight to the FSCS you don't have to wait for them to be declared in default. Visit www.fscs.org.uk/
Have they got it in writing that you lose your money back if in arrears?

May be worth sending a SAR to see where you stand.

I hoped you would be along to answer here.:beer:

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

It may be something to do with the money they get from the firm if a complaint is made against them. I think the first 3 are free and then each one after is £360. I suppose if four loans are one complaint then the FOS gets stung for £1080. Am i perhaps way off here:rolleyes:

Currently more than 70% of the ombudsman service’s funding comes from the fees which it charges firms for considering complaints (usually £360 – the first two cases per firm per year not being charged for). The remaining funding comes from annual fees payable by all firms, calculated according to their role in the different industry sectors they are involved in.

Arh I did not think of that hun, rather confusing though isn't it ?

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Arh I did not think of that hun, rather confusing though isn't it ?

Its there though isn't it. I think logical like you do and most of us complainers whereas the Ombudsman is mostly funded by these and if they can make some extra then they will perhaps. Doesn't help us though does it. Like you say it costs us money and time. I think this needs changing. Perhaps the ombudsman can charge a certain amount to a firm for more than one complaint from the same person perhaps??? Speed things up for us a bit.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Its there though isn't it. I think logical like you do and most of us complainers whereas the Ombudsman is mostly funded by these and if they can make some extra then they will perhaps. Doesn't help us though does it. Like you say it costs us money and time.

Yes exactly.
My Endeavour has been going on for months, and its another complaint now since July, its taken up loads of time and money, even though the FOS has got back with a letter to say that they may be able to look at it, I have other thoughts on my mind now for when it actually comes to the crunch and when reading again that letter (I added earlier today) about that prior to 2007 thing...... , I just hope I'm not wasting more time again.....:mad:

marshallka

I have now downloaded another complaint form against Barclays trading as firstplus and the settlement of the loan. This is nothing to do with the PPI rebate but i need to first speak to them about it as i have one complaint in about the PPI rebate:eek: . This is something which i have complained as unfair terms in consumer contracts in that in my loan contract it did not state that the use of rule 78 would be used in the settlement. It only stated that there would be a statutory rebate if settled early. I find this a misleading term in that we did not know that this meant use of this rule. We had no idea of the way this was worked out. I don't know again if its something they can or cannot look into but worth a shot i think. No where in my t and c's did it mention its use. We requested 3 settlements and between the last two there were 18 months and 18 months repayments of £285. This only reduced the figure by £477. At the time of settlement we let our solicitor deal with this as i had had enough and was going through the biopsies/scans on a lump and could not cope with anymore. I have found all my letters and going to send them to the FOS to prove what a difficult time we were having in that month. I can only but try.

Re ultrasound on lump previous biopsy on 10th april, 2003
Settled on 15th April, 2003

I was not in the mood to argue

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

I have now downloaded another complaint form against Barclays trading as firstplus and the settlement of the loan. This is nothing to do with the PPI rebate but i need to first speak to them about it as i have one complaint in about the PPI rebate:eek: . This is something which i have complained as unfair terms in consumer contracts in that in my loan contract it did not state that the use of rule 78 would be used in the settlement. It only stated that there would be a statutory rebate if settled early. I find this a misleading term in that we did not know that this meant use of this rule. We had no idea of the way this was worked out. I don't know again if its something they can or cannot look into but worth a shot i think. No where in my t and c's did it mention its use. We requested 3 settlements and between the last two there were 18 months and 18 months repayments of £285. This only reduced the figure by £477. At the time of settlement we let our solicitor deal with this as i had had enough and was going through the biopsies/scans on a lump and could not cope with anymore. I have found all my letters and going to send them to the FOS to prove what a difficult time we were having in that month. I can only but try.

And good for you.;)
That amount they reduced it too was pathetic !!

I don't blame you here, this was very unfair, they should be able to get this sorted out.
Glad your letting them know also about all your problems hun, as it must have been an horrific time for you.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Yes exactly.
My Endeavour has been going on for months, and its another complaint now since July, its taken up loads of time and money, even though the FOS has got back with a letter to say that they may be able to look at it, I have other thoughts on my mind now for when it actually comes to the crunch and when reading again that letter (I added earlier today) about that prior to 2007 thing...... , I just hope I'm not wasting more time again.....:mad:

I had a letter back from my complaint against Barclays trading as Firstplus and have noticed now that the complaint ref number has PPI in it and this is about unfair rebate. My other complaint that said settlement did not if this is anything to go by.

This was the follow up letter to say awaiting being assigned an adjudicator.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

And good for you.;)
That amount they reduced it too was pathetic !!

I don't blame you here, this was very unfair, they should be able to get this sorted out.
Glad your letting them know also about all your problems hun, as it must have been an horrific time for you.

It was quite frightening then as just tooo young and must admit i worked myself into a frenzy. It turned out ok but yes very bad time for us all. I just did not have money on my mind at that time as you can imagine and certainly did not have the strength to fight them. I don't think they will be able to do anything but I will not settle til i know.

Firstplus trap you to them and there is no getting out.

di3004

With my Endeavour its states the amount of insurance rebate has been calculated having regard to the Consumer Credit (Rebate on Early Settlement) Regulations 1983.


Loan amount £21,000
Single PPI £2835.00
Total loan £23835.00

Interest rate 9.52% per annum, fixed for the first 12 months.
300 months.


The total amount as seen in the SAR underwriters paperwork paid into that loan was that of £26,565.18.

Balance at October 2005 £23561.73

Add interest to date of settlement £374.71

Add future charges £40514.39

Total amount payable before deducting rebate £64450.83

Less amount of rebate (including insurance) £40924.79

Sub Total to legal fees £23526.04

Add sealing fee £120

Total amount payable for setting on 30 Nov 2005 £23646.04
.............................................................................................
They had actually rebated just over £1.5k off this in total.