PPI Reclaiming successes and failures

smitchy73 wrote: »

I would go back to them and say that you don't think that they adhered to the FSA Handbook and quote the following.

"3.3.5 G The

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]firm [/FONT]should not reject a complainant’s account of events solely on the basis

that the complainant signed documentation relevant to the purchase of the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy[/FONT]."

"3.3.6 G The

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]firm [/FONT]should not reject a [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]complaint [/FONT]because the complainant failed to exercise

the right to cancel the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy[/FONT]."

"3.3.11 G The

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]firm should consider in all situations whether it communicated information
to the complainant in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading and with due

regard to the complainant’s information needs."

"3.6.2 E In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]firm should presume that the
complainant would not have bought the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]payment protection contract [/FONT]he bought if

the sale was substantially flawed, for example where the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]firm[/FONT]

(2) did not disclose to the complainant, in good time before the sale was
concluded, and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading, that the

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]

policy

was optional; or
(3) made the sale without the complainant’s explicit agreement to purchase

the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy[/FONT]; or

(4) did not disclose to the complainant, in good time before the sale was
concluded, and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading, the
significant exclusions and limitations, i.e. those that would tend to affect

the decisions of [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]customers generally to buy the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy[/FONT]; or

(6) did not take reasonable steps to ensure the complainant only bought a

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy for which he was eligible to claim benefits; or

(8) did not disclose to the complainant, in good time before the sale was
concluded, and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading, the total
(not just monthly) cost of the

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy separately from any other prices (or

the basis for calculating it so that the complainant could verify it); or

(9) recommended a single premium

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]payment protection contract without
taking reasonable steps, where the [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy [/FONT]did not have a pro-rata refund,
to establish whether there was a prospect that the complainant would

repay or refinance the loan before the end of the term; or

(12) in a sale of a single premium

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]payment protection contract, failed to
disclose to the complainant, in good time before the sale was concluded,
and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading:
(a) that the premium would be added to the amount provided under the
credit agreement, that interest would be payable on the premium

and the amount of that interest; or

(c) (if applicable) that the complainant would not receive a pro-rata
refund if the complainant were to repay or refinance the loan or
otherwise cancel the single premium

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]policy after the cooling-off

period."

Have a read through these and see if they mean anything to your claim and if they do I'd email the ppi customer service team, and copy the CEO David Thorburn into it.

The email addresses are
[EMAIL="AQU.PPI@eu.nabgroup.com"]AQU.PPI@eu.nabgroup.com[/EMAIL] for the cust svcs team

and

[EMAIL="David.Thorburn@eu.nabgroup.com"]David.Thorburn@eu.nabgroup.com[/EMAIL] for the ceo

You might find the reply from the customer services a normal one but the ceo's office should send you a seperate reply, I sent mine's last Friday, for reply from CS at 9.15am on Monday, and from manager at 8.30pm the same day, completely different replies as well.

I done this last week and it was passed on to a senior manager at the ppi to deal with, got a call to say an offer was in the post.

If there is anything else you can think about in your mis-sale add that too to the email, was the box already ticked? Was there supporting media(leaflets etc to tell you about exclusions etc).

Clydesdale refused our complaint a couple of years ago and I waited till after the JR, discovered we hadn't used medical condition as a reason for the mis-sale which the OH has and seems to have been succesful.

Good luck and keep us posted, would like to see more complaints upheld against Clydesdale/Yorkshire bank.:D
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

Scotty1.7 wrote: »

Quick updaet from me on mine

Co-Op. Still with them, still awaiting any further info on the 16 week ruling (FSA have now confirmed it is correct)

MBNA, No Response yet after then 28 day letter

And a new one has reared its head- Welcome Finace. I didn't even realise it was on the loan they gave me so I've filled in there paperwork and I'll send it off to see what happens there.

LAURA77 wrote: »

Hi

I really dont believe that they will settle all claims by the 31st august. Phoned them yesterday and he told me that my ppi refund had been calculated on the 10th august but ive had no letter as yet, also said they would pay out within a couple of days of sending the agreement back!! It's just a waiting game im afraid :(:(

Dizzywithmoney wrote: »

My son has just rung me - he couldnt be "bothered" to faff about putting a claim in against a loan he had with Black Horse, thought it was a total waste of time (I was named on the account so he could get the loan when he finished uni), he had added and changed this loan so many times (it was so confusing) he and he didnt have all the loan account numbers just the current one. He was told the last time he changed it that if he didnt take PPI out he wouldnt be able to increase it (he is a school teacher!). So he took it out and then he had a nightmare several months later trying to cancel the PPI. I nagged and nagged him to put a claim in, which he eventually did with my help, but it got rejected saying that he had had back the PPI from when he cancelled it. I worded another letter to them stating this wasnt what he was asking for (as though it was from him - us mum's have to do everything I think) and with his agreement and little additions to the letter we sent it off.

Anyway he has just rung this morning as he has just received a reply from them not only have they reduced his loan by around £2500 he is also getting another £2500 paid direct into his bank acount. He is so pleased now that I nagged him!!!

Me thinks he owes his mummy big time!!!

carlytalkstostrangers wrote: »

Hi! I was reclaiming for a protected loan from Barclays from a few years ago. I was in a stable job at the time with the council and so very minimal chance of redundancy, and if sick would have received six months full pay six months half pay. However I was made to feel the PPI was compulsory and that I may not have got the loan if I hadn't accepted it. I now know this was misleading.

I was contacted through a cold call a few months ago by The XXXX and claiming is not something that would probably have ever occurred to me, I don't usually talk to cold callers either but was in a particularly good mood that day and took the call. I decided to go along with making a claim, thinking nothing would ever come of it but what did I have to lose?
The judicial review came and went and I waited patiently, until eventually the post came today and Barclays have deposited just over £5,000 into my account!

Now my fiance is definitely going to make a claim of his own, probably using Martin's template forms but possibly again using a claims handler. The XXXXXX will be taking 30% of my refund but I don't begrudge them as without their call I may never have made the claim.

My advice - go for it - what have you got to lose? If the thought of getting it right is daunting, use a claims handler.

Carly :j