Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Former MSE Helen
    • By Former MSE Helen 30th Jan 15, 8:48 AM
    • 2,324Posts
    • 971Thanks
    Former MSE Helen
    MSE News: PPI complaints process to be reviewed
    • #1
    • 30th Jan 15, 8:48 AM
    MSE News: PPI complaints process to be reviewed 30th Jan 15 at 8:48 AM
    The Financial Conduct Authority is to review whether the PPI complaints process is working for consumers...

    Read the full story:

    PPI complaints process to be reviewed




    Click reply below to discuss. If you havenít already, join the forum to reply. If you arenít sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

Page 1
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 30th Jan 15, 9:09 AM
    • 7,603 Posts
    • 4,840 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #2
    • 30th Jan 15, 9:09 AM
    • #2
    • 30th Jan 15, 9:09 AM
    The amount paid out in auto-payments or for spurious reasons which the FOS supports suggests it is working fine. People being rejected because they ticked a box to say they wanted it in a non-advised sale or claiming they didn't know about it when it was on every bank statement or because they never needed to claim on it are not examples of the process not working for consumers - more so because the FOS overturns loads of valid rejections!

    Those of us without miss-sold products are losing out as bank profits are hit (affects us all as tax payers for the banks we own) and it reduces pension schemes and savings and banks offer lower interest rates or fewer benefits on current accounts.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 30th Jan 15, 9:31 AM
    • 98,597 Posts
    • 67,050 Thanks
    dunstonh
    • #3
    • 30th Jan 15, 9:31 AM
    • #3
    • 30th Jan 15, 9:31 AM
    I like the bit on timebar. The article starts with:
    The Financial Conduct Authority is to review whether the payment protection insurance complaints process is working for consumers.
    It then says directly after:

    One of the options on the table is a possible time limit on claims
    A timebar is not for the benefit of consumers. It is to reduce liability and opportunistic complaints lingering and give the issue a final closure point.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
    • chanz4
    • By chanz4 31st Jan 15, 9:30 AM
    • 10,046 Posts
    • 2,992 Thanks
    chanz4
    • #4
    • 31st Jan 15, 9:30 AM
    • #4
    • 31st Jan 15, 9:30 AM
    I think they should time bar, we are clogging the complaints system for genuine complaints and not band waggon jump on's.


    If there was no bar, whats stopping them looking at the limitations act on debt
    Don't put your trust into an Experian score - it is not a number any bank will ever use & it is generally a waste of money to purchase it. They are also selling you insurance you dont need.
    • redjamie
    • By redjamie 4th Feb 15, 1:15 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    redjamie
    • #5
    • 4th Feb 15, 1:15 PM
    PPi
    • #5
    • 4th Feb 15, 1:15 PM
    hi guys any help here
    we tried to claim the PPi as did nt pay out when I ended up out of work after a bad car accident
    also tried via the miss sold option was told because it was sold before 2003 we could nt claim
    anyone know if that's correct as just not getting anywhere with this
    I believe that it is wrong on both accounts
    any help or information would be great
    thanks
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 4th Feb 15, 2:38 PM
    • 7,603 Posts
    • 4,840 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #6
    • 4th Feb 15, 2:38 PM
    • #6
    • 4th Feb 15, 2:38 PM
    hi guys any help here
    we tried to claim the PPi as did nt pay out when I ended up out of work after a bad car accident
    also tried via the miss sold option was told because it was sold before 2003 we could nt claim
    anyone know if that's correct as just not getting anywhere with this
    I believe that it is wrong on both accounts
    any help or information would be great
    thanks
    Originally posted by redjamie
    If your product was sold before January 2005 and was not from a bank or building society it was pre-regulation and so the business were within their rights to dismiss the complaint.

    If you have complained and had a full and final rejection then you have 6 months to refer to the FOS for review - after that you will be time-barred from this case.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 4th Feb 15, 2:48 PM
    • 98,597 Posts
    • 67,050 Thanks
    dunstonh
    • #7
    • 4th Feb 15, 2:48 PM
    • #7
    • 4th Feb 15, 2:48 PM
    If you have complained and had a full and final rejection then you have 6 months to refer to the FOS for review - after that you will be time-barred from this case.
    Although just to clarify, that the FOS only have a remit on post January 2005 sales or if there was an earlier body that the firm was a member of.

    I believe that it is wrong on both accounts
    Insurance regulation started 14th January 2005. Banks and credit card providers were members of earlier bodies and will consider pre-regulation sales. However, the likes of car dealers, loan brokers, most mortgage advisers and IFAs etc were not regulated with an earlier body and can refuse to deal with pre-2005 sales.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • JS80
    • #8
    • 17th Apr 15, 11:33 AM
    PPI Companies Payment
    • #8
    • 17th Apr 15, 11:33 AM
    Hi

    I signed up with a CMC years ago (before realising how easy it is to do myself!) and recently had a call from them to say that one of my claims had been paid out. When I contacted Barclays to confirm this and provide my new contact details for payment I was informed that the CMC did not appeal the inital refusal and it was Braclays who reviewed my case and decided to pay out. They had tried to reach me at my old address and subsequently went back to the CMC when they could not reach me and this is how the CMC knew about the claim being paid out. They are now demanding to be paid 30% of what I received essentially for doing nothing (I was informed by the bank that i do not have to pay them and have rights) but am not sure. I don't want this to go against my future credit files as not payinh an outstanding debt. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
    • Nasqueron
    • By Nasqueron 17th Apr 15, 12:51 PM
    • 7,603 Posts
    • 4,840 Thanks
    Nasqueron
    • #9
    • 17th Apr 15, 12:51 PM
    • #9
    • 17th Apr 15, 12:51 PM
    As they submitted the claim they are entitled to their contractual cut - had they not submitted it, you would not have got anything like it or not. As a general rule they will threaten you with court and a CCJ (ruining your credit for 6 years) but you could try and negotiate a discount - good luck with it
  • JS80
    Thank you Nasqueron- i figured it would be the right thing to do.
    • Insider101
    • By Insider101 17th Apr 15, 5:24 PM
    • 1,044 Posts
    • 594 Thanks
    Insider101
    Hi

    I signed up with a CMC years ago (before realising how easy it is to do myself!) and recently had a call from them to say that one of my claims had been paid out. When I contacted Barclays to confirm this and provide my new contact details for payment I was informed that the CMC did not appeal the inital refusal and it was Braclays who reviewed my case and decided to pay out. They had tried to reach me at my old address and subsequently went back to the CMC when they could not reach me and this is how the CMC knew about the claim being paid out. They are now demanding to be paid 30% of what I received essentially for doing nothing (I was informed by the bank that i do not have to pay them and have rights) but am not sure. I don't want this to go against my future credit files as not payinh an outstanding debt. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
    Originally posted by JS80
    This is coming up a lot. See my response on this thread for what I suggests.

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5222233
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

220Posts Today

3,089Users online

Martin's Twitter