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
    • Arthurarthur52
    • By Arthurarthur52 29th Sep 19, 5:42 PM
    • 29Posts
    • 4Thanks
    Arthurarthur52
    Nationwide rejection.
    • #1
    • 29th Sep 19, 5:42 PM
    Nationwide rejection. 29th Sep 19 at 5:42 PM
    We have just been rejected for nationwide ppi on mortgage but they found in favour on CC.

    They state that we would have been fully informed of our opinions in 1992 and letters 1992-94 but we disputed this. Because they were agents for the society who latter went on to distance themselves from the resale of a 2nd mortgage when we established that the endowment was worth so little in terms of the amount we had invested we then challenged abbey life and from 2002 we went to a repayment mortgage.

    Further to this they asked in a 1hr and 20 min call at 2020 at night about other funding which was savings, employment benefits and bank of mum and dad. When the decision was made they still had not received the questionnaire we sent back 20 days earlier due to the internal post delays and we didnít receive either the questionnaires 1st time or the rejection letter but our credit card bill arrived ok. They stated that itís a balance of probabilities decision but FOS who appear less than impartial state they donít have to ask pertinent questions over what we were told.

    You could say that we should have known better but 26 and 22 going to a mortgage broker you assume they are people you can trust. All we were told is sign here here here etc but the nationwide are not bothered.

    They want us to go to the FOS - we know why £600 is less than £10k but a senior manager at the fos on a none related matter state that we donít have to take that approach.

    Due to the way that the nationwide agent treated us and the failure of the recent post not to have arrived we feel we should take the agent to small claims court on the basis his argument was flawed. Add to this one day he said he refused to speak to us and then is supposed to have tried to ring 4 days later but no message left or call received.

    We expect the nationwide to bring out the big gun solicitors to defend him but interested on the views of others.
Page 1
    • SonOf
    • By SonOf 29th Sep 19, 5:52 PM
    • 1,780 Posts
    • 2,038 Thanks
    SonOf
    • #2
    • 29th Sep 19, 5:52 PM
    • #2
    • 29th Sep 19, 5:52 PM
    They state that we would have been fully informed of our opinions in 1992 and letters 1992-94 but we disputed this. Because they were agents for the society who latter went on to distance themselves from the resale of a 2nd mortgage when we established that the endowment was worth so little in terms of the amount we had invested we then challenged abbey life and from 2002 we went to a repayment mortgage.
    None of that has anything to do with Nationwide sold PPi though.

    They stated that it’s a balance of probabilities decision but FOS who appear less than impartial state they don’t have to ask pertinent questions over what we were told.
    The majority of MPPI complaints are rejected. And the FOS are currently only upholding around 1 in 10 MPPI complaints. Non-advised sales do not have to ask the same level of questions that advised sales do.

    You could say that we should have known better but 26 and 22 going to a mortgage broker you assume they are people you can trust. All we were told is sign here here here etc but the nationwide are not bothered.
    Mortgage brokers do not sell Nationwide insurance products.

    They want us to go to the FOS - we know why £600 is less than £10k but a senior manager at the fos on a none related matter state that we don’t have to take that approach.
    They dont want you to do the FOS. They will offer no opinion either way except tell you that you have the right to refer your complaint to the FOS.

    Due to the way that the nationwide agent treated us
    Earlier you said it was a mortgage broker. Now it is a Nationwide estate agent. Which is it?

    we feel we should take the agent to small claims court on the basis his argument was flawed.
    Most court PPI cases fail.

    Your post is confusing as you refer to Abbey Life (who never had a PPI product), you mention a mortgage broker but they wont sell Natiownide products and you mention a Nationwide rep.

    You also haven't told us your complaint reasons or the reasons for the rejection. So, at this stage, it is very difficult to know what you are talking about and why.
    • Arthurarthur52
    • By Arthurarthur52 29th Sep 19, 6:35 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Arthurarthur52
    • #3
    • 29th Sep 19, 6:35 PM
    • #3
    • 29th Sep 19, 6:35 PM
    In 1992 nationwide used brokers. And have provided us with full details of the payments

    The agent I referred to was the so called ppi investigator who admits he is trained to nationwide standards.

    The ref to abbey life was the independent FA who sold the original ppi put us into abbey life. When we approached the IFA in 2001/2 they distanced themselves from everything and abbeylife reluctantly restored us to a repayment position.

    Why would cases fail at small claims when it is less than the balance of probability and the arguemebt is flawed to say we received post when they cannot even send it to us or receive it now.

    The complaint reason was the fact that we had employee benefits and savings that meant it was pointless to us to have insurance and the amount we paid was inconsistent with the level of cover and as far as we were aware it was compulsory.
    The same arguement to which they found in our favour for the CC. details taken by the same nationwide agent / investigator
    • Moneyineptitude
    • By Moneyineptitude 29th Sep 19, 9:11 PM
    • 24,930 Posts
    • 14,438 Thanks
    Moneyineptitude
    • #4
    • 29th Sep 19, 9:11 PM
    • #4
    • 29th Sep 19, 9:11 PM
    The complaint reason was the fact that we had employee benefits and savings that meant it was pointless to us to have insurance
    Originally posted by Arthurarthur52
    How would "employee benefits" pay your mortgage if you had been made redundant? Similarly, I doubt your savings would last long with no regular income.

    There is a reason Mortgage PPI is still retailed today and that reason is that it is a very potentially useful insurance which covers you against loss of your home.

    The Bank has informed you only that you have the right to refer your complaint to the Ombudsman, not that they actually recommends you should.
    Trust me, they don't want to pay the Ombudsman fee or issue you a refund.

    Basically (and perhaps unsurprisingly) your complaint has failed.

    Good luck in court, you'll very much need it.
    • SonOf
    • By SonOf 29th Sep 19, 10:27 PM
    • 1,780 Posts
    • 2,038 Thanks
    SonOf
    • #5
    • 29th Sep 19, 10:27 PM
    • #5
    • 29th Sep 19, 10:27 PM
    In 1992 nationwide used brokers.
    in 1992, Nationwide offered their mortgages through brokers and also via their branch network. They still do that today. Brokers do not retail Nationwide insurances. Only Nationwide mortgage clerks did that. Brokers used either the insurance of their tied provider (if they were linked to a salesforce) or from the whole of market (if they were independent).

    The ref to abbey life was the independent FA who sold the original ppi put us into abbey life. When we approached the IFA in 2001/2 they distanced themselves from everything and abbeylife reluctantly restored us to a repayment position.
    Abbey Life never retailed their products via IFAs. They only retailed via their own FA salesforce. Hence why Abbey Life took responsibility for the complaint.

    Why would cases fail at small claims when it is less than the balance of probability and the arguemebt is flawed to say we received post when they cannot even send it to us or receive it now.
    1 - 15 year time bar can be applied.
    2 - lack of evidence
    3 - regulatory rules are not the same as laws and regulatory rules did not exist on insurance until January 2005.
    4 - Mortgages were not regulated under the consumer credit act. Cases that have succeeded in courts have relied on the CCA but you wont be able to with a mortgage.

    The complaint reason was the fact that we had employee benefits and savings that meant it was pointless to us to have insurance and the amount we paid was inconsistent with the level of cover and as far as we were aware it was compulsory.
    Employer benefits is not a strong reason with MPPI. It is good with short term loans and credit cards but not mortgages. The FOS has been rejecting complaints on that basis. You awareness or lack of awareness cannot be evidenced. There has to be something that points towards a likely wrongdoing.

    The same arguement to which they found in our favour for the CC. details taken by the same nationwide agent / investigator
    And credit card PPI covers a short term debt. So, the upholding on the credit card and rejecting on the mortgage seems to be a correct decision.
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

969Posts Today

7,545Users online

Martin's Twitter