MSE News: Banks put PPI claims on hold in defiance of regulator

mrs-stressed · 12 October 2010 at 11:21AM

brokeally wrote: »

Has anyone spoken to LTSB today??

Would we want to get a patronising and smarmy person telling us what we already know?? I would rather poke hot pins in my eyes!!

Alpine_Star · 12 October 2010 at 11:24AM

brokeally wrote: »

Has anyone spoken to LTSB today??

Someone is trying - keep an eye here http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?t=24880

dunstonh · 12 October 2010 at 11:26AM

Part of me says good for Lloyds. part of me says how can they get away with it.

i think what you are seeing is not just a PPI issue here but an exasperation of over 10 years of FSA scattergun regulation where they chop and change their minds and move the goalposts retrospectively.

The FSA regulates by not issuing rules but issuing vague guidelines. Then years down the road it fines a company for not interpreting the guidelines right. All the other companies then alter their rules to avoid a fine themselves. Whereas had the FSA been clear at the start, it would not have happened. Then you have the times when they say something didnt follow the guidelines but the guidelines didnt exist back then and they are retrospectively applying them. A bit like prosecuting a smoker for smoking in a pub 2 years before the ban came in. FSA regulation is inconsistent, poorly thought out and expensive to consumers. No-one is calling for no regulation. Just a regulator that is clear, consistent and fair on both sides.

It needs a big gun to be able to afford to take on the FSA and in that respect they dont get much bigger than LloydsTSB.

I know some people won't be happy with this but it may help to understand why it may be happening.

mrs-stressed · 12 October 2010 at 11:28AM

I have just sent my third email off to Eric Daniels( - head of Lloyds) and I dont feel any better actually. I am so tired of all this running round. If I was cheating the system or trying to make a false claim then I would have just gone quietly away. But no. My claim is genuine and the FOS found this also to be true and found in my favour. But still Lloyds prevaricates and doesnt pay up what it OWES. I dont care what anyone says - and I dont care about shareholders or investments or anything financial other than my own measly little pot of money (which as youve guessed is totally empty) - I just want someone to put their hands up and say sorry and then cough up. Oh, sorry myself - I was dreaming then or was it a nightmare!!

Mrs s.

marshallka · 12 October 2010 at 11:37AM

dunstonh wrote: »

Part of me says good for Lloyds. part of me says how can they get away with it.

i think what you are seeing is not just a PPI issue here but an exasperation of over 10 years of FSA scattergun regulation where they chop and change their minds and move the goalposts retrospectively.

The FSA regulates by not issuing rules but issuing vague guidelines. Then years down the road it fines a company for not interpreting the guidelines right. All the other companies then alter their rules to avoid a fine themselves. Whereas had the FSA been clear at the start, it would not have happened. Then you have the times when they say something didnt follow the guidelines but the guidelines didnt exist back then and they are retrospectively applying them. A bit like prosecuting a smoker for smoking in a pub 2 years before the ban came in. FSA regulation is inconsistent, poorly thought out and expensive to consumers. No-one is calling for no regulation. Just a regulator that is clear, consistent and fair on both sides.

It needs a big gun to be able to afford to take on the FSA and in that respect they dont get much bigger than LloydsTSB.

I know some people won't be happy with this but it may help to understand why it may be happening.

Similar thing happening with the MOJ, no clear guidelines and then you wonder why claims companies fleece everyone that they can, its cause they can.

As regards the FSA being expensive to consumers I thought it was paid for by the firms fees? Mind you I wonder who pays the firms fees in the first place? Not for much longer though as they abolishing it aren't they?

marshallka · 12 October 2010 at 11:38AM

mrs-stressed wrote: »

I have just sent my third email off to Eric Daniels( - head of Lloyds) and I dont feel any better actually. I am so tired of all this running round. If I was cheating the system or trying to make a false claim then I would have just gone quietly away. But no. My claim is genuine and the FOS found this also to be true and found in my favour. But still Lloyds prevaricates and doesnt pay up what it OWES. I dont care what anyone says - and I dont care about shareholders or investments or anything financial other than my own measly little pot of money (which as youve guessed is totally empty) - I just want someone to put their hands up and say sorry and then cough up. Oh, sorry myself - I was dreaming then or was it a nightmare!!

Mrs s.

Let us know if they reply mrs stressed. I bet his inbox is full!!

Alpine_Star · 12 October 2010 at 11:39AM

dunstonh wrote: »

i think what you are seeing is not just a PPI issue here but an exasperation of over 10 years of FSA scattergun regulation where they chop and change their minds and move the goalposts retrospectively.

The FSA regulates by not issuing rules but issuing vague guidelines. Then years down the road it fines a company for not interpreting the guidelines right. All the other companies then alter their rules to avoid a fine themselves. Whereas had the FSA been clear at the start, it would not have happened.

No. What you're seeing here is precisely what the thread title describes:

Lloyds are blatantly ignoring clear FSA rules to deal with complaints and it doesn't get any more complicated than that.

This is clearly far removed from Lloyds somehow misinterpreting any current guidelines.

marshallka · 12 October 2010 at 11:45AM

Lloyds are actually teaching that to take matters into your own hands is OK.... that is how I see it.

Edit to add this

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/bankers-prepare-for-massive-pay-rises-2104092.html

More than half of Britain's bankers expect to see substantial rises in their bonus payouts this year, according to a survey by eFinancialCareers, the City recruitment agency.

This is news of today isn't and not old news????

dunstonh · 12 October 2010 at 12:38PM

This is clearly far removed from Lloyds somehow misinterpreting any current guidelines.

Its not about Lloyds misinterpreting guidelines. Its about them putting their foot down saying the FSA have got it wrong too often and its time to take a stand.

As regards the FSA being expensive to consumers I thought it was paid for by the firms fees? Mind you I wonder who pays the firms fees in the first place? Not for much longer though as they abolishing it aren't they?

Regulation and compliance costs around 1/3rd of a small financial services firm's income. A larger firm benefits from economies of scale but then they tend to suffer other compliance issues. However, the cost is of course ultimatly paid for by the consumer. So, it will be the consumer that pays for the Lloyds vs FSA battle.

Whilst the FSA is on its way it, a replacement is coming in. We have been here before. The PIA (and LAUTRO) were abolished and become the FSA. Same issues, same arguments, different initials. The only ones gaining are the stationers as all documentation removes traces of FSA to replace them with "new initials".

Alpine_Star · 12 October 2010 at 12:56PM

dunstonh wrote: »

Its not about Lloyds misinterpreting guidelines. Its about them putting their foot down saying the FSA have got it wrong too often and its time to take a stand.

If Lloyds have a dispute with the FSA, is it acceptable to communicate their grievance by taking it out on their customers?

MSE News: Banks put PPI claims on hold in defiance of regulator

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free