Guarantors given PPI

Teddymorris · 20 July 2019 at 9:48PM

Hi all

I’m very new to this so apologises if I’ve missed a thread on this already.

Basically I finally took the plunge to see if I had any PPI owing and surprised to learn I did. However, I will only receive half of the money and will still have to pay extra. The companies 24% as the other half is going to my ex mother in law who acted as guarantor. She didn’t pay any of the loan nor contributed in anyway other then signing the documents in our initial meeting. Is there anything I can do to fight this or is it hopeless? Any help much appreciated.

Teddy

SonOf · 20 July 2019 at 11:14PM

However, I will only receive half of the money and will still have to pay extra. The companies 24% as the other half is going to my ex mother in law who acted as guarantor.

This does not sound correct.

The guarantor is not named on the loan. So, is not party to any PPI arranged. However, if she wasnt a guarantor but actually named on the loan as a borrower (i.e. your terminalogy is not quite right) then a 50% refund to each party is correct.

And as you used a claims company, they are quite correct to charge you their 24% against the full redress paid and not just the amount received by you.

singhini · 21 July 2019 at 1:52AM

Teddymorris wrote: »

Hi all

I’m very new to this so apologises if I’ve missed a thread on this already.

Basically I finally took the plunge to see if I had any PPI owing and surprised to learn I did. However, I will only receive half of the money and will still have to pay extra. The companies 24% as the other half is going to my ex mother in law who acted as guarantor. She didn’t pay any of the loan nor contributed in anyway other then signing the documents in our initial meeting. Is there anything I can do to fight this or is it hopeless? Any help much appreciated.

Teddy

Can you give a bit more clarity on the wording highlighted please (you can only have PPI owing if it was miss-sold). The fact you have PPI on a policy doesn't mean it was miss-sold (I really hope the company acting on your behalf isn't just trying to encourage you to make a claim on the fact they will get a % of the money - now that really would be unethical of them).

Also your question is really deep - The mother-in-law acted as a guarantor which helped you out, yet you don't want her to receive anything (The fact you didn't default is irrelevant IMHO as perhaps you wouldn't have got the policy without her help in the first place?). I suppose in short i'm saying she helped you so why not help her.

OP - Please ignore my comments as I'm a cynical person (I've got anumber of close friends who have claimed PPI and i'm confident in the knowledge they only claimed because they could, not because they were miss-sold! - that's not just unethical, its fraud).

Teddymorris · 21 July 2019 at 9:56AM

Thank you for your responses.

In short I was vey you d when I married and used all my savings to get the house with my ex. After a burglary we decided to get new windows fitted throughout based on my age and lack of find the only way to do this was a loan. My mother-in-law was named as guarantor to help secure the loan as her daughter was poor with money hence me applying. The company have said as both are named on the loan she is entitled to half. But when explained in the bank she was only named if I couldn’t repay the loan back it would then fall on her to repay.

When the marriage broke down I left the house taking nothing and had to clear a lot of debt my ex ran up on our joint credit card. I know She helped me to get the loan to benefit her daughter and I and know this will open a whole can of worms as I never claimed my share of house etc as I just needed a fresh start For various reasons.

normanna · 21 July 2019 at 12:08PM

I still think you're confused.

What you might mean is she was named on the loan (so joint) and you were to make payments. She would only then make payments if you could not afford to do so as was her obligation anyway if it was a joint loan. Therefore she was not technically a guarantor.

A guarantor is never actually named on the loan but is contractually obliged to pay if you default.

If it was a joint loan then she is entitled to half the PPI and unfortunately you have to pay the claims company from your proceeds as only you entered into the contract with them.

Hope this helps

SonOf · 21 July 2019 at 12:11PM

My mother-in-law was named as guarantor to help secure the loan as her daughter was poor with money hence me applying. The company have said as both are named on the loan she is entitled to half.

I think you are getting mixed up with the terminology.

A guarantor is not named on the loan. It is a separate agreement.
In your case, it appears she was a joint borrower. Hence why she was named on the loan.

But when explained in the bank she was only named if I couldn’t repay the loan back it would then fall on her to repay.

It doesnt matter the reasons for doing it. It is a factual position that she was a borrower.

Teddymorris · 21 July 2019 at 1:20PM

Thank you all for the responses.

When I applied it was sold to us in he bank that she was a guarantor and that’s why her name would be on the agreement. She never made payments just myself. This is why it’s confusing it was sold to us as I’ve stayed and that’s why I’m trying to see if I have a case. It was never sold to me as having a joint loan but that she was named as guarantor I admit I was young but I remember the terminology they used when giving me this product. That’s why this is soo confusing I was sold it as I’ve explained.

[Deleted User] · 21 July 2019 at 2:25PM

Teddymorris wrote: »

I remember the terminology they used when giving me this product.

Looks to me that you took out a joint loan with an "informal" agreement between yourselves that you would make all the repayments. If your Mother-In-Law had been simply the guarantor, she would not now be entitled to 50% of your joint loan PPI redress. She was obviously a named borrower.

Regardless, since there is nothing you can do to change this, you'll have to be content with the share you have been awarded and pay the CMC's fee based on the whole amount. Your only other recourse is to appeal to your former MIL which you infer is not an option. Certainly, the Bank will never pay you her half.

TrickyDicky101 · 21 July 2019 at 2:27PM

The loan is irrelevant. If she was named on the PPI policy then she is due half the recompense. No ifs, no buts.

SonOf · 21 July 2019 at 2:56PM

When I applied it was sold to us in he bank that she was a guarantor and that’s why her name would be on the agreement.

That is just wording. They wouldnt lend to you but they would lend to your ex MIL. So, by making it joint, they got both of you on the hook for payments if one failed. It isn't a proper guarantor arrangement. It is joint borrowing.

It guaranteed that if you failed to pay, the ex-MIL would be required to pay. However, that isnt a guarantor arrangement.

Guarantors given PPI

Comments

Categories

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