PPI Reclaiming discussion Part II

maxdp

di3004 wrote: »

I do wonder why there is such a company like the FLA if they are unable to help, as I said above I was also referred by these by the FOS and turned away from them too.
We think we have another lead when being told that, and again its a complete waste of our time.:rolleyes:

I know it is so frustrating these firms hide behind legal babble and expect the general public to be put off. If makes me so cross both my business partner and OH has been taken in by these people and I am on a mission to get things sorted. Personally I have been lucky or cute:rolleyes: in as much as I have always questioned all these things and have not been caught personally but have when partner and OH have been . It makes me so cross not with them but with these institutions. I am on a mission:eek:

I will not give up until I feel compensation is relevant. However I achieve that.:T

pinknico

angelwillow wrote: »

FLA must be working late tonight - just received this latest response.

If you read the details of the FSA's fine you will see that the FSA itself states that the fine only applies to that specific period. Neither GE nor the FLA has placed this restriction on the fine.

Stupid people ,we know that the fine only applies to that year, but it does not mean they didnt mis sell before ,they just werent discovered to be doing so as the fsa were not investigating. By their own argument the only time they mis sold was when they were being looked at by the FSA how silly of them.:rolleyes:
Sorry for being grumpy but it makes me so mad:mad:

pinknico

Meant to say ,got an email from the FOS on a SUNDAY !:eek:

maxdp

angelwillow wrote: »

FLA must be working late tonight - just received this latest response.

If you read the details of the FSA's fine you will see that the FSA itself states that the fine only applies to that specific period. Neither GE nor the FLA has placed this restriction on the fine.

Oh Fancy:mad:

marshallka

angelwillow wrote: »

I think they have to be registered by the Ministry Of Justice or something similar - sure I read it on here somewhere on one of Tiggraes posts.

Claims regulator and OFT issue consumer alert.

Claims regulator and OFT warn consumers about risks of being misled over the enforceability of consumer credit agreements

MoJ/OFT Consumer alert 21 August 2008

The Claims Management Regulator at the Ministry of Justice and the Office or Fair Trading (OFT) are warning consumers to think carefully before responding to businesses claiming that they can arrange for outstanding balances under loan, credit card and other consumer credit agreements to be written off and secure compensation.

Consumers are advised to seek independent advice before using the services of businesses that offer to find ways to render consumer credit agreements unenforceable. Businesses can only provide claims services if they are authorised and regulated by the MOJ under the Compensation Act 2006. Such businesses may also need to hold an appropriate OFT consumer credit licence.

Consumers may be asked to pay large up-front fees, often up to £500, for the businesses to review their credit agreements. Some businesses are claiming that many of these agreements are completely unenforceable, that consumers can have debts cancelled and claim back thousands of pounds. Consumers should think very carefully before committing themselves to making claims and handing over hundreds of pounds in advance to do so, even where refunds may be promised if the claim is unsuccessful.

Consumers with specific debt problems may wish to contact their local Citizens Advice Bureau who will often be able to provide advice free of charge. Free, impartial advice can also be obtained from the contacts at the end of this alert.

NOTES Claims management regulation

1. The Ministry for Justice (MoJ) is the Claims Management Regulator in England and Wales. Ministry of Justice checks a wide range of information about businesses before authorising them, monitors the services the business provides, will take action against businesses that breach the rules, which could include suspension or cancellation of authorisation.

2. Authorised businesses have to follow strict conduct rules. They must not ‘cold call’ in person, or engage in any form of high pressure selling, give written information on how to pursue a claim and the costs involved before a contract is agreed, allow a ‘cooling off’ period of at least 14 days after signing a contract in case the consumer changes their mind, operate a customer complaints scheme that meets relevant criteria. All the rules governing the conduct and behaviour of authorised businesses can be found on the Claims Management Regulation website.

maxdp

pinknico wrote: »

Have to say I am doing that on two loans as wasn't getting anywhere. Yes I borrowed the money but if they have messed me about I have no worries about getting anythng back I can.

Good for you go for it. I will go down the legal:rolleyes: route but if not I will try any route well done Pinknico.:D

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

So if they are registered by the Ministry Of Justice I assume this is another form of a regulator ? Am I correct folks ?;) Cheers.

When I had used that claims company for the tax credit thing a week or two ago and did not realise they were a claims company I checked them out on the MOJ register and they were not there so i reported them. I got a reply within two days and suprisingly enough there website has disappeared now.:rolleyes:

maxdp

woodybuzz wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what "non-advised" sales are in relation to selling PPI?

I am in the process of reclaiming PPI on an HSBC graduate loan I took out in 2005. All the conversation was done via secure e-mail, but I don't recall being informed it was a single premium PPI, nor aware of the consequences (i.e. a total rip off) of a single premium policy. When I signed the agreement in the branch, no explanation of single premiums was given.

The "insurance sales acknowledment slip" has branch instructions saying this is only to be completed for "non advised sales".

So do I have a leg to stand on?

Hi have you sent off for full Sar. Do not be put of by these people they will do whatever they can to get out of it. Go the full hog and then go to the FOS if they do not come up trumps then there are other options you may be able to go for. Do not give up put figures on here and people will help you.:D

marshallka

woodybuzz wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what "non-advised" sales are in relation to selling PPI?

I am in the process of reclaiming PPI on an HSBC graduate loan I took out in 2005. All the conversation was done via secure e-mail, but I don't recall being informed it was a single premium PPI, nor aware of the consequences (i.e. a total rip off) of a single premium policy. When I signed the agreement in the branch, no explanation of single premiums was given.

The "insurance sales acknowledment slip" has branch instructions saying this is only to be completed for "non advised sales".

So do I have a leg to stand on?

Non advised sales only came in after January, 2005

What is the difference between an advised and non- advised sale of PPI?


In short, you give advice when you make a personal recommendation to the customer. A non-advised sale is when no personal recommendation is made to the customer.
For all sales, both advised and non-advised, a firm must pay due regards to the interest of its customers to ensure that appropriate information and disclosures are made to the client and that communications are clear fair and not misleading.
A non-advised sale cannot be led by the adviser and they can only confirm that they offer a number of products, or one product, that the customer chooses themselves.
More information is available in our factsheet: Advised and non-advised sales.

Take a look here and see what applied to your sale.
Don't give up now.

pinknico

maxdp wrote: »

Good for you go for it. I will go down the legal:rolleyes: route but if not I will try any route well done Pinknico.:D

It wont cost me anything so there was nothing to lose.:A !!!