Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
missold p p i
On behalf of my good woman. she has been gainfully employed and has a good credit history, several years ago she changed her job and has been employed as a temp ever since. she has had several loans with different providers and has always, as we have found, has had P P I. After reading some of the blurb we would be interested in finding out about claiming with out putting our foot in it or being screwed by some companys.
Any help is greatefully received
Any help is greatefully received
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Jbird. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Which have some good and clear advice, with a link to an on-line claiming tool with a letter template if you are eligible.
http://www.which.co.u...eclaiming-ppi-252928/
http://www.which.co.u...eclaiming-ppi-252928/
Don't don't don't use a 3rd party - you can download an Ombudsman questionnaire just fill in as much as you can remember and send it to the company that the PPI was arranged with
3rd parties will sometimes charge you an up front fee and take a percentage of any compensationsometime as much as 33% plus vat and you will still have to fill in the same questionnaire
3rd parties will sometimes charge you an up front fee and take a percentage of any compensationsometime as much as 33% plus vat and you will still have to fill in the same questionnaire
Was she employed or self employed when she took out the PPI. If she was self employed she would have a case if the policy excludes claims for self-employed people; but if she was employed when she took it out and then changed her status I'm not sure that constitutes mis-selling.
I'm always puzzled though as to why people didn't realise at the time that they were paying PPI
I'm always puzzled though as to why people didn't realise at the time that they were paying PPI
Many people had the PPI added without knowing it was there. Many (like myself) were wrongfully told we had no chance of being accepted for the loan unless we took the PPI or that the only way we could get a loan without it would be if the interest was through the roof, which was also a load of balls.
Whilst there was clearly some misselling I still don't understand some of the claims and I share Jules77's views to some extent.
For example it is sometimes claimed "the only way we could get a loan without it would be if the interest was through the roof". Maybe I'm naive but that suggests to me the need to shop around for a better deal or if you can't find terms you like don't take out the loan. In such cases if someone was prepared to take out a loan on those terms then, then why complain about the terms afterwards?
For example it is sometimes claimed "the only way we could get a loan without it would be if the interest was through the roof". Maybe I'm naive but that suggests to me the need to shop around for a better deal or if you can't find terms you like don't take out the loan. In such cases if someone was prepared to take out a loan on those terms then, then why complain about the terms afterwards?
Thank you all for your answers, they pretty much echo my own thoughts. before i ask again. It strikes me that when a robber is caught and tried it seems ludicrus that the robber determines his own sentence, ergo the bank that sold the dodgy insurance is the one you can go direct to, to claim. is it me?
Question; The good woman has had a credit card and has always had ppi. the card is one from her only bank, so it is all `in house` subsequently she became a temp and has had several bank `reviews`/ financial health check which at the time I suspected they were no more than a way to get you buy one there moody products. So the bank had all the information post change of employment but the ppi was continued and nothing was said. All the above has been on going for about 5yrs. Any suggestions. Thankyou
Question; The good woman has had a credit card and has always had ppi. the card is one from her only bank, so it is all `in house` subsequently she became a temp and has had several bank `reviews`/ financial health check which at the time I suspected they were no more than a way to get you buy one there moody products. So the bank had all the information post change of employment but the ppi was continued and nothing was said. All the above has been on going for about 5yrs. Any suggestions. Thankyou
I don't blame you for claiming. I think your analogy is a little off the mark though. In theory the mis-selling problem should make banks etc think more carefully about customers' needs. It should also make customers take more care to shop around, look more closely at what they are buying and look more closely at their bills in future so they aren't suddenly surprised to find out years later that they are paying for something they didn't know about.
Yes, some people failed to read what they were buying.
Also, whilst there was clearly a problem with misselling, exacerbated by commission, I wonder whether some of those claiming they never knew they had PPI did in fact know at the time. For example it was quite well known that those with poor credit ratings would not get a loan at a decent rate without it, and some were prepared to pay it as an insurance policy but as they never needed to claim on the insurance it is convenient now to say "I never wanted it/knew I had it".
Also, whilst there was clearly a problem with misselling, exacerbated by commission, I wonder whether some of those claiming they never knew they had PPI did in fact know at the time. For example it was quite well known that those with poor credit ratings would not get a loan at a decent rate without it, and some were prepared to pay it as an insurance policy but as they never needed to claim on the insurance it is convenient now to say "I never wanted it/knew I had it".