Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • just1
    • By just1 12th Apr 18, 11:40 PM
    • 21Posts
    • 12Thanks
    just1
    HSBC - Marbles - BOS - HFC PPI
    • #1
    • 12th Apr 18, 11:40 PM
    HSBC - Marbles - BOS - HFC PPI 12th Apr 18 at 11:40 PM
    Hi,

    I complained about PPI on my Marbles card that was closed in 2010.
    I received my decision letter from BOS saying that the time PPI was charged it was HSBC's decision.
    HSBC have defended the mis-sold complaint saying they can see PPI payments were made but in 1999 the application online had a tick-box and the banks didn't make mistakes so the miss-selling complaint was not to be upheld even though they admit the agreement paperwork cannot be located.

    BOS have decided that I will get a Plevin payment of 3600 back which cheers me up.

    I can't help thinking that I should take HSBC to the Ombudsman as they admit PPI payments were made...or should I just take the money and drop it?

    Cheers in advance
    Last edited by just1; 12-04-2018 at 11:43 PM.
Page 1
    • Moneyineptitude
    • By Moneyineptitude 12th Apr 18, 11:52 PM
    • 22,610 Posts
    • 12,154 Thanks
    Moneyineptitude
    • #2
    • 12th Apr 18, 11:52 PM
    • #2
    • 12th Apr 18, 11:52 PM
    I can't help thinking that I should take HSBC to the Ombudsman as they admit PPI payments were made..
    Originally posted by just1
    It's not somehow wrong that you simply had PPi. In order for it to be refunded it has to have been mis-sold to you.

    You also appear to be confused about the reasons your complaint was rejected. Online complaints are normally rejected because there was no tick-box, not because there was.

    I recommend you re-read the rejection letter to fully appreciate whether you have valid reasons for referring to the Ombudsman.
    • just1
    • By just1 13th Apr 18, 12:02 AM
    • 21 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    just1
    • #3
    • 13th Apr 18, 12:02 AM
    • #3
    • 13th Apr 18, 12:02 AM
    Hi,
    Thanks for replying, attached is the relevant part of my letter:

    https://imgur.com/j3P1nBN
    • Moneyineptitude
    • By Moneyineptitude 13th Apr 18, 12:14 AM
    • 22,610 Posts
    • 12,154 Thanks
    Moneyineptitude
    • #4
    • 13th Apr 18, 12:14 AM
    • #4
    • 13th Apr 18, 12:14 AM
    Hi,
    Thanks for replying, attached is the relevant part of my letter:

    https://imgur.com/j3P1nBN
    Originally posted by just1
    So there was a tick-box on the application but it was not pre-populated and so clearly optional. This indicates that there was no mis-sale, as no one actually sold it to you. If the policy was unsuitable therefore, you mis-bought it yourself online.

    So you don't appear to have anything valid to refer to the Ombudsman. The fact that they no longer have the original Agreement does not help your case I'm afraid.
    Last edited by Moneyineptitude; 13-04-2018 at 12:30 AM.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,634Posts Today

7,659Users online

Martin's Twitter