GE money Plevin ppi claim

I have tried to reclaim my ppi from GE money using the Plevin rule.My loan was paid off in 2006 but the PPI policy was valid until October 2008
Ge money refused to repay me and the FOS agreed with them.They state it is because the loan was paid off before April 2008. I disagree the plevin rule is about commission on the PPI policy.I contacted the FCA and they have told me I have a valid claim.
Does anyone know how I can force the FOS to investigate this.They have refused so I don't know what to do next.
Any help would be greatly appreciated
«1

Comments

  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 8,553
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    If the loan wasn't active since 6th April 2008 you don't qualify for Plevin. Not sure how your PPI policy was active 2 years after the loan was paid off as it wasn't covering anything. Did you pay the loan off early?


    Have you spoken to the FOS with your written confirmation from FCA that the claim should be valid? Do you have written proof the PPI was still active in 2008?
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 115,904
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    edited 20 May 2018 at 11:18AM
    Ge money refused to repay me and the FOS agreed with them.They state it is because the loan was paid off before April 2008. I disagree the plevin rule is about commission on the PPI policy.I contacted the FCA and they have told me I have a valid claim.

    The FCA telephone front line is not manned by knowledgeable people. Are you sure telephone person at the FCA actually said what you think they said. Everybody was the right to make a complaint under Plevin. The FCA guidelines explicitly said that all complaints had to be considered and they would not eliminate any areas (there was consultation on whether regular monthly plans whould be eliminated for example). So, the FCA person is correct that you have a right to make the complaint. It does not mean you will succeed. The FCA should not be giving you any indication of success in a complaint based on a one-side conversation. That is not within its remit and leads to foolish outcomes.

    The FOS are correct. Your interpretation is wrong. It is not about the commission in isolation. It is about the consumer credit act amended in 2006 which came into effect in 2008. This is where the 2008 date comes from. it was the 2008 rules that Plevin was based on. So, a credit agreement must either have been taken out after 6th April 2007 or an existing one continue beyond 6 April 2008 for the Plevin ruling to apply.

    if the debt was settled and credit agreement ended on settlement (which is the case with loans) before 6 April 2008 then Plevin cannot apply as the consumer credit act no longer applies to you.

    FCA published the rules in PS17/03 and in section 4.60 it says:

    Scope of our rules and guidance
    4.60 In CP15/39 and CP16/20, we proposed107 that our rules and guidance concerning Plevin
    should apply:

    - only to PPI complaints where a claim could be made against a lender108 under s.140A and
    an order made to remedy any unfair relationship under s.140B of the CCA109: that means
    in particular (110) that the rules and guidance will apply if the PPI states it covered or covers (111)
    a credit agreement where sums are payable, or capable of becoming payable (112), under it
    on or after 6th April 2008
    - to any complaint meeting this criterion, regardless of the other characteristics of the PPI,
    credit agreement, or nature and relationships of businesses behind these

    (109) Sections 140A.C were inserted into the CCA by the Consumer Credit Act 2006. Section 140A provides the court with wide powers
    under s.140B in connection with a credit agreement where it considers that the relationship between a debtor or creditor arising out
    of the agreement (or the agreement taken with any related agreement) is unfair because of various things, including anything done
    (or not done) by or on behalf of the creditor. Sections 140A.C came into force on 6th April 2007
    (110) It is possible that an order could be made under s.140B in other factual scenarios !!!8211; one example is where a credit agreement was
    made after 6th April 2007 and completed before 6!April 2008
    (111) This includes partial coverage, for example, when only part of the term of a credit agreement is covered

    It is section 140 of the CCA that matters and it covered agreements that started after 6th April 2007 or were still in force at 6th April 2008. Your does not meet those criteria according to the FCA final rules and guidance and they are correct to reject it.


    The FCA went on to say (section 465)
    We remain of the view that it
    would not be appropriate under our consumer protection objective to widen
    the application of our proposed rules and guidance on PPI beyond the scope
    of s.140A-B CCA. We did not require firms to disclose commission to retail
    consumers under ICOB or ICOBS (unless requested by the consumer118) and it
    is clear that in Plevin the Supreme Court addressed the question of unfairness
    under s.140A. So aligning the application of our rules and guidance with that
    legislation is most appropriate and proportionate, given that our aim is to
    ensure fair and consistent PPI complaint handling in light of Plevin.

    --

    So, the person you spoke to on the phone is contradicting the published rules of the FCA.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • bluefox_09
    bluefox_09 Posts: 14 Forumite
    The PPI policy continued after loan was paid off early because I was not aware that the loan had a PPI policy attached to it.
    I received a letter from the PPI provider when it was about to expire.That was the first time I was made aware of the policy.
    The person at the FCA seemed to think as the policy was still active after April 2008 I had a valid claim.Their words not mine.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 115,904
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    The person at the FCA seemed to think as the policy was still active after April 2008 I had a valid claim.Their words not mine.

    Yet the FCA guidelines say different.

    The FCA typically stay out of individual consumer issues and leave it to the complaints process and FOS to decide outcomes. Complaints handlers at firms and the FOS are trained specifically to deal with complaints and the FCA guidelines have been read at a very high level.

    You have been declined by a complaints handler. The FOS have declined it. I would decline it (and I handle compliance at my firm). The FCA guidelines are published and available and their own words say it is "out-of-scope". You got someone on the phone who told you different who a) shouldn't be making any such comment and b) probably isn't even aware of the rules.

    if you have the name of the person you spoke to at the FCA, you may wish to ring them back and tell them that the FCAs own guidelines say it is out-of-scope and other people you have spoken to from financial firms say they believe it to be out-of-scope. So, what it is that this person thinks makes it in-scope?
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 26,612
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Forumite
    bluefox_09 wrote: »
    The person at the FCA seemed to think as the policy was still active after April 2008 I had a valid claim.Their words not mine.
    Although rhe FCA is indeed the Regulator, only the FOS is the final arbiter of individual complaints.

    Your phone call to the FCA switchboard was therefore a waste of everybody's time, I'm afraid
  • Does anyone on here think that my claim should be investigated taking in the consideration the up date to the Plevin case that has been mentioned on this site.I refer to the fact that some claims that were originally rejected should now be required investigated.
  • -taff
    -taff Posts: 14,401
    First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic First Post
    Forumite
    No. The loan was not active. And if you were paying a monthly PPI it was set up correctly.
    Shampoo? No thanks, I'll have real poo...
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 115,904
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    bluefox_09 wrote: »
    Does anyone on here think that my claim should be investigated taking in the consideration the up date to the Plevin case that has been mentioned on this site.I refer to the fact that some claims that were originally rejected should now be required investigated.

    No.

    Plevin only applies to debts that were still outstanding in 2008. You repaid in 2006.

    You reference to the fact some claims that were originally rejected should now be required investigated has no impact on this as your case is not in scope.

    Plevin came about because of a change in s140a of the consumer credit act 2006 effective from 2008. If the debt had gone one day past the 2008 date you would fall in scope. However, as you repaid in 2006, you are nowhere near the date.

    Remember that Plevin is a failure under the consumer credit act. Not FCA rules. There has to be a s140a breach and that cannot be the case when the debt didnt exist when that rule changed.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • So taking in the consideration the PPI policy was still active in 2008, do I still have a case.
    You may ask why did I have a PPI policy still active after the loan was really paid.
    Answer. the full premium was paid up front without my knowledge. the first I knewabout the policy was when a got a letter telling me it was about to finish.
    I hope this clears things up.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 115,904
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    So taking in the consideration the PPI policy was still active in 2008, do I still have a case.

    No. It is the debt that matters. You repaid the debt in 2006.
    Answer. the full premium was paid up front without my knowledge. the first I knewabout the policy was when a got a letter telling me it was about to finish.

    The premium was paid before 2008. The debt ended before 2008. You do not fall within scope of plevin.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 606.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.7K Life & Family
  • 247.2K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards