PPI V Discharged Bankruptcy

gaz52 · 5 February 2012 at 1:46PM

New to this lark so please bare with me. Through the banks / credit card people I had everything covered by PPI, I am self employed and after an accident which was going to put me off work for about 9 months I found out that none of the PPI's were going to honour the insurances so after advise l filed for bankruptcy. I told the judge and the Receiver about all the PPI which could be claimed back and they weren't really interested and only 2 companies actually paid anything to the receiver. Since then many companies have tried to get the PPI money back for me but as I was still under the bankruptcy and would loose any money recovered and end up with a bill from the recovering company, I never went ahead with any of them. However, in Sept 09 I was discharged and last year agreed to go ahead and claim the PPI using a well known company. I informed them of my position and told them about being discharged, they required a copy of the discharge order and as the N'West had not paid anything to the Receiver they went on to claim the money back. They were successful and I'm now in posession of the letter of acception of £8700! My problem is, they say at the bottom of the letter that the money will first settle any open accounts, the remainder will be sent by cheque. Surely my accounts were frozen and closed during the bankruptcy in 2008 and being 'Discharged' was the end of it, unless I inherit or win the lottery. I tried to claim the PPI from them years ago, still got the letter...

dunstonh · 5 February 2012 at 1:56PM

I told the judge and the Receiver about all the PPI which could be claimed back and they weren't really interested

You cannot claim it back just like that. You need a complaint reason and for the companies to agree to it. If you hadnt have gone bankrupt then they could have paid out.

Since then many companies have tried to get the PPI money back for me but as I was still under the bankruptcy and would loose any money recovered and end up with a bill from the recovering company, I never went ahead with any of them.

Which is correct and its good to hear the claims companies were telling you this.

My problem is, they say at the bottom of the letter that the money will first settle any open accounts, the remainder will be sent by cheque. Surely my accounts were frozen and closed during the bankruptcy in 2008 and being 'Discharged' was the end of it, unless I inherit or win the lottery. I tried to claim the PPI from them years ago, still got the letter...

If Natwest had to write anything off as part of the bankruptcy then they can use the redress to go against those write offs. Also, they can contact the receiver and see if it can go to other creditors as well. The latter doesnt always happen but the former is quite the norm.

gaz52 · 5 February 2012 at 7:00PM

So even though B'Thornton has managed to get over £8000 I could still end up with a bill for 25%( their charges) and still not see any of the money ??!! I told them about the bankruptcy ect so that they new the facts and they said they could still get ME the money. It now sounds like they have done nothing more than give me another bill to pay, and being a discharged bankrupt means very little. I read somewhere else that PPI insurance money was being challenged as being seperate from loans and there for not being automaticaly the banks money, the usurers were not N'West and showed as a separate charge. The Banks put me in this position after refusing to honour a policy they quite happily sold me and collected on for over 15 years, they didn't pay it to the receivers before l was discharged yet now they can still get the repayments regardless. It seems that the banks can do no wrong and fraud doesn't apply to them, if l had failed to disclose funds to the receiver l could have been prosecuted which is what the bank did by not paying the Receiver the PPI money in the first place.

magpiecottage · 5 February 2012 at 7:27PM

I think you have a valid complaint against the ambulance chaser.

Copy and paste the following e-mail to complaints@ppiclaimcompany.co.uk (assuming it is Belmont Thornton) with a cc (NOT bcc) to consumer@claimsregulation.gov.uk (after putting in your personal details):

COMPLAINT

I wish to register a complaint of misselling against Belmont Thornton in that you have breached Client Specific rules 1a, 1b, 1c and 1f of the Conduct of Authorised Persons Rules 2007.

I make this complaint because I told you that I had been made bankrupt when you offered your services and therefore you knew, or ought to have known, that any redress awarded in my favour would go to my creditors in the first instance and thus I would not be in a position to pay any fees you charged.

Accordingly, the information you gave me breaches rule 1c because it was unclear and misleading.

You have breached rules 1b and 1f because you have deliberately incurred a debt against me and in your favour for a service from which you knew, or ought to have known, that I would be unlikely to personally receive a benefit that exceeded your charges.

As a result of the above, your dealings with me are also in breach of rule 1a because you have been neither fair nor reasonable.

I trust you will now confirm in writing that your fee should be limited to 25% of the any payment I actually receive which, in reality, is nothing.

I am sending a copy of this e-mail to your regulator.

dunstonh · 5 February 2012 at 9:06PM

he Banks put me in this position after refusing to honour a policy they quite happily sold me and collected on for over 15 years, they didn't pay it to the receivers before l was discharged yet now they can still get the repayments regardless.

The whole point of bankruptcy is to draw a line. Your creditors can longer come after you. However, that works both ways with other things sorted out prior to the bankruptcy too.

It seems that the banks can do no wrong and fraud doesn't apply to them

They havent committed fraud. The PPI issue is not a legal one. It was a moving of the goal posts decision by the FSA. Also, your went bankrupt. You cannot expect to leave your creditors in the lurch whilst ending up financially better off by getting money on pre-bankruptcy transactions.

if l had failed to disclose funds to the receiver l could have been prosecuted which is what the bank did by not paying the Receiver the PPI money in the first place.

You didnt have a policy that gave bankruptcy protection. That is why it didnt pay out.

gaz52 · 5 February 2012 at 11:04PM

I thought the whole idea of PPI was to cover you for the unexpected, I, like many others did just that and paid our dues expecting these policies to pay out. In reality few, if any actually did. This is the fraud bit that l was on about because the banks new all about your employment criteria yet never contacted you to tell you that you didn't qualify then returned any payments you'd made, they just kept on taking the money and decided not to pay out later once you'd claimed. This is money under false pretences and either they should be made to honour their policy or be prosecuted, simply paying it back with interest after a lengthy court battle is like not prosecuting a thief but letting him pay you back when it suits him/ her. Your advise is something of a let down but welcome none the less, at least someone is trying to lead me forwards and now l have some tools to deal with B'Thornton. These companies need to be shook up a bit, l nearly signed and returned the acceptance form but smelt a rat, how many other people have been caught out like that!! Still cant get my head round the discharged bit but as long as l don't get any more bills I'll get over it. Thanks again, Gaz52

dunstonh · 5 February 2012 at 11:29PM

I thought the whole idea of PPI was to cover you for the unexpected, I, like many others did just that and paid our dues expecting these policies to pay out.

No. Like any insurance policy, it is to cover you for a range of specified events, should they occur. Whilst there are some PPI plans that do cover bankruptcy, the generic norm is that they do not. I have seen some in the past cover divorce.

If the insurance policy does not cover an event then it will not pay out should that event occur. If it does cover it then it will.

This is the fraud bit that l was on about because the banks new all about your employment criteria yet never contacted you to tell you that you didn't qualify then returned any payments you'd made, they just kept on taking the money and decided not to pay out later once you'd claimed.

The bank would know at point of sale but after that the responsibility for any future changes or issues lies with you (like most retail products)

This is money under false pretences and either they should be made to honour their policy or be prosecuted, simply paying it back with interest after a lengthy court battle is like not prosecuting a thief but letting him pay you back when it suits him/ her.

There has been no court case ruling that PPI sales were wrong. Indeed, only a few people have taken the issue to court and have lost as no laws were found to be broken.

Your advise is something of a let down but welcome none the less, at least someone is trying to lead me forwards and now l have some tools to deal with B'Thornton.

No point telling you anything other than how it is whether it is good or bad. BT is where your issue lies.

These companies need to be shook up a bit, l nearly signed and returned the acceptance form but smelt a rat, how many other people have been caught out like that!!

To give you an idea, you could be set up and running as a claims company in about two weeks. No qualifications, knowledge, experience required. You just promise to behave knowing the regulator (the ministry of justice) hasnt got the time or the inclination to deal with rogue claims companies until they start creating a large enough workload in complaints. So, in effect you can cold call, tell porkies and take large amounts off people for sticking a stamp on an envelope containing a one-size-fits-all template letter.

DON79 · 5 February 2012 at 11:55PM

Sorry if I have missed something but I don't think the OP was wanting the PPI policies he had to provide protection against bankruptcy....

He said above that he was self employed and was not going to be able to work for 9 months due to an accident. When he tried to claim on PPI for the accident/not being able to work, that's when the PPI failed which then later resulted in his bankruptcy.

???

gaz52 · 6 February 2012 at 8:43PM

Correct, l had the normal PPI you would have on any card/ bank loan and they weren't interested when l tried to claim when l was laid off for a month, it was then that l found out that l would not be covered for sickness either. They have a catalogue of excuses and brush off's, it was so frustrating at the time but l can't see it changing anything now. I've been in touch with BT today and given them a run down of what has happened, they want me to put it in writing. I also contacted the receivers to clarify a few points before talking to BT and they would like all the details ect from N'West. In short, lesson learned with the age old adage 'if it sounds too good to be true .....' and no l doubt l'll ever buy PPI again. Thanks again for everyone's' help, if l get stuck with BT then get back on the forum again.

dunstonh · 6 February 2012 at 9:28PM

Correct, l had the normal PPI you would have on any card/ bank loan and they weren't interested when l tried to claim when l was laid off for a month, it was then that l found out that l would not be covered for sickness either.

Sorry. I thought it was the bankruptcy that they were declining on (as you can see from my response). However, I can also see why they rejected the claim. Unemployment means unemployment. i.e. you are no longer trading and have ceased paying class 2 NI and are signing on. It does not cover periods of low or no work. That is the nature of self employment.

However, it doesnt change anything as even if successful in the complaint, the money can still go to the receivers.

gaz52 · 7 February 2012 at 7:59PM

This is where the confusion lies with PPI and self employed. They rarely ask if you are self employed and even when you fill out the forms saying that you are or tell them they still say your covered, hense the flood of claims for miss sold PPI from self employed people. I didn't actually know that l could sign on to start with, but even when l did the PPI's still wern't interested. The next thing that could really upset me is that when l get my compo for my injury, will they be able to take that as well................

PPI V Discharged Bankruptcy

Comments

Categories

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