PPI and gladstone Brookes
24 replies
4.6K views
Quick links
Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support
Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support
Replies
'Barclaycard made a mistake and has written to GB as your authorised CMC to advise that they have rectified the situation.
Barclaycard has confirmed that the offer was made to you is a result of GB's approach and the information provided on your behalf by GB.
I am therefore satisfied that the fee charge has been requested correctly and in line with your agreement with GB"
The case is now going to higher management for the final decision.
My wife has also had a similar review from Barclaycard, although her case was slightly different. We have paid GB all their fees, as i had their initial paperwork and felt we were liable. Below is a summary of my wifes case:
3 years ago we used GB to reclaim PPI on various cards held but my wife that i paid off when we got together in 2000. Barclaycard initially said they knew she had an account but couldn't trace the details of the PPI paid. Barclaycard refunded approx £2500 which i am sure was on the basis of average policy duration and the average premium paid. GB recommended we accepted the refund and we paid their commission.
Fast forward to this April 2019 and out of the blue we got a congratulations email from GB and a couple of hours later my wife received a cheque for £3500 from Barclaycard. The letter from Barclaycard explained they had traced all her accounts and the payment was the additional PPI refund due.
A request for GB fee's followed which we paid as the initial request for fees said if the case was reopened we would be liable to pay further fees to GB.
Where we correct to pay the second fee to GB? Where GB correct to request the second fee.
Thanks
Claims Management Companies are now fully regulated.
The fact that you've already paid weakens your position, but you should still complain.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/342291/Claims-management-regulation-business-bulletin-Aug-2014.pdf
Quote:
If a CMC
fails to identify during the claims process that an
offer made to their client is incorrect or otherwise
inappropriate – and to advise the client of this –
then it is likely that the CMC will have failed to
comply with this obligation and therefore be in
breach of contract.
Some concluded PPI cases have been reviewed by
financial institutions and in some cases additional
redress has been awarded to customers. In such
cases it may be inappropriate for CMCs to
automatically charge their clients further fees in
respect of such additional awards.
The general position is that the agreement between
the CMC and the client will have concluded at the
point at which the client received redress and the
CMC issuing the corresponding invoice.
If a CMC seeks further fees from clients where the
contract has concluded, this may be in breach of
General Rule 1 which requires you to conduct your
business with honesty and integrity. It may also be
considered an act of fraud by false representation
(Section 2, Fraud Act 2006).
So Gladstone Brookes have done what the Ministry of Justice said may be considered an act of fraud.
I did seriously think about not paying the fee but the GB initial settlement letter appeared clear, that they could have a second bite if two refunds were made.
I didn’t even think to look here first.
Thanks very much
I would like to thank everyone for their help.
Well done. I am emailing GB my request for a refund today. Fingers crossed.
The letter GB sent with the second refund states "If your bank revisits your offer in future and increases your redress. we will be entitled to our fees on the additional amount." Not even may be entitled, will be entitled.
I have asked GB to explain:
• The reason why the second invoice was issued.
• The reason why GB did not comply with the guidance issued in the Claims Management Regulations Business Bulletin No.23 (August 2014).
• The details of the additional work undertaken to secure the additional redress from Barclaycard, the reason(s) why I was not asked to sign a second contract and the reason(s) why I was not periodically updated during the 33 months between June 2016 and March 2019.
• Whether the person(s) who issued the second invoice and email has committed a criminal offence under section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006.
• The reason why Gladstone Brookes failed to identify and advise me during the initial claim settlement process that the offer made to me from Barclaycard was incorrect or inappropriate.
May be a bit OTT but it covers the points in the Claims Management Regulations Business Bulletin No.23. (Thanks Dunstonh)
Keep you posted.