Righto

 

My missus has received a letter from MBNA saying she MAY have been mis sold PPI

 

I'm guessing they think she has, but they have asked her to fill out a form that asks a fucking shitload of personal questions about whether she would have got sick pay etc etc.

 

Should she fill all the details in, or just return the form mainly blank and tell them to fucking well cough up? It seems like they are asking these questions in order to wriggle out of it to me.

 

Anyone done it? She had a credit card with PPI on it so must be due something back. I'm not going via some 3rd party cunt, so this seems to be a half decent opportunity to get some money for designer drugs. And nappies.

I have had messages and people calling saying I could be owed 3grand, my loan was 10-12 years ago though?

I have recently done this myself, sent three letters out and MBNA and Black Horse are both paying it me back, not heard from HSBC yet.

You need to remember the thousands who took it out because they thought that might need to claim, but now re saying it was mis sold and so claiming it back.

 

Same folk who blame the banks for the world economic crisis, want free bank accounts, cheaper mortgages, put in whiplash claims, won't go to burnley cos they missed cheap tickets, blame the ticket office and the foreigners behind the bar and do not get them started on folk coming over here doing jobs that they would not do themselves.

 

 

Spot on this pal.

 

I always said NO to PPI stuff, my old man was always insistant, but im told I am owed money.

 

I won't lie, at the moment a couple of grand is as good as life changing for me!!! 

I had it on a CC years back and it was like £1 a month, it was very difficult to not have it and they virtually forced you to have it. IMO.

I've had the cold calls and the letters about this but haven't pursued it - had a credit card for about 10-12 years but no idea whether I would qualify or not - reckon I've got a chance? Could do with a few quid.

Just go on financial ombudsman website, fill in the questionnaire and send it off to whovever you've had a loan/credit card with etc....

 

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi/PPI-consumer-questionnaire.doc

See now

 

I WAS in the "just don't ask for it" camp.

 

However, they basically told my missus that she wouldn't be allowed a credit card without taking the ppi out, which was a lie. 

 

Personally, I've never taken it, but plenty of people seem to have been given thinly veiled threats when taking out loans etc.

 

What you need to remember, is that some people get credit cards when buying holidays etc as the insurance is better.

 

Not everyone gets credit because they are fucking paupers.

 

So stop being spastics.

See now

 

I WAS in the "just don't ask for it" camp.

 

However, they basically told my missus that she wouldn't be allowed a credit card without taking the ppi out, which was a lie. 

 

Personally, I've never taken it, but plenty of people seem to have been given thinly veiled threats when taking out loans etc.

 

What you need to remember, is that some people get credit cards when buying holidays etc as the insurance is better.

 

Not everyone gets credit because they are fucking paupers.

 

So stop being spastics.

 

 

 

 this is the key bit ,it was this bit that won me mine, the woman selling me the loan said she wouldnt give me the loan unless i took out silver service protection,  i stated this on my form and also said that, as it stated at the time of the call that it could be recorded, they should have no difficulty finding it and checking it that she did indeed say this to me.

they didnt bother checking and took me at my word ( it was probably a well known sales policy at the time within the organsation to push this stuff)

letter of apology with the details of the bank transfer came next cant lose if they have said that to you as it's wrong information/ forcing sales, doesnt matter if you agreed to it after that as you were coerced into it.

Sure I've read recently complaints to the Financial Ombudsman have increased to around 20,000 a week with 80% being upheld and they've had to take on an extra 1000 staff to cope.

Ppi the recession buster!

People have mis sold and deserve compensation.

 

Not everyone has been mis sold but they are still claiming and as for these companies that have set up to encourage them or even worse. The fact is the banks can not keep with the complaints, the government can not take the banks side because the banks are the baddies.

 

Just like the accident lawyers they are scum.

 

remember with lloyds being owned to a large extent by the government it is taxpayers who are indirectly funding this.

 

 

 

 ( it was probably a well known sales policy at the time within the organsation to push this stuff)

 

This is fact.

 

Ive heard from people involved in the selling of it at the time that they were told by management to hold the forms out with their hand over the PPI section, imply that it improved the chance of loans being authorised and make it sound like it was part of the main policy.

 

The fact lloyds set aside billions purely to pay out customers should say it all. All banks knew they were mis-selling its just the FSA were shit and the profit margin so high they didnt give a shit!

This is fact.

 

Ive heard from people involved in the selling of it at the time that they were told by management to hold the forms out with their hand over the PPI section, imply that it improved the chance of loans being authorised and make it sound like it was part of the main policy.

 

The fact lloyds set aside billions purely to pay out customers should say it all. All banks knew they were mis-selling its just the FSA were shit and the profit margin so high they didnt give a shit!

So everyone who got it was mis sold ?

 

Strange when discussing quid quick on the shirts the general attitude was if people are daft enough......

 

Lloyds announced they were paying because the volume of complaints, genuine and otherwise, were costing millions to respond to, sure the fact they were owned by the government had no bearing on it.

 

The emphasis has been put on the banks to prove it was not mis sold.

 

If anyone thinks everyone claiming was actually mis sold then they are deluded, the parasite solicitors getting rich on this are even worse. It is like people making claims for whiplash when fuk all is wrong, think you work in insurance so will know how much premiums have dropped since the claims chaser have been much more controlled.

 

Easy to blame banks and insurers

If it was hidden or you were cajoled/forced, you should get money back. If not, you shouldn't.

It's as simple as that really but there's always those who think they 'deserve' it

If it was hidden or you were cajoled/forced, you should get money back. If not, you shouldn't.

It's as simple as that really but there's always those who think they 'deserve' it

 

The theory is good, but in practice it will be difficult for a bank to prove that there was no mis-selling on any individual case.

It is far easier to lob money to the undeserving, as well as the deserving, and move on.

 

I spent a decade working in the Personal Pensions Review - the first of the mis-selling sagas.

The essential driver of the original problem was a TV advert by DHSS suggesting freedom from chains.

Millions of people chose to opt out of SERPS as a result, since it simply diverted NI contributions and didn't hit the pocket.

Of course, the Government came out unscathed..

And don't even start me on Equitable Life - any company which prides itself on not hoding anything back for reserves was bound to fail, the only surprise being it took 200 years to happen.

So everyone who got it was mis sold ?

 

 

 

It is like people making claims for whiplash when fuk all is wrong, think you work in insurance so will know how much premiums have dropped since the claims chaser have been much more controlled.

 

Easy to blame banks and insurers

 

I dont think everyone who had it was mis-sold however, I do reckon a majority were purely because the selling practises were not transparent.

 

I do work in Insurance and Swinton have just had a £7.4m fine for the way they sold add-on policies (legal, personal accident and breakdown insurance) to their customers. The way their scripts were set out the customer was always lead to the top level of cover. I imagine PPI was the same, not just the slimy salesman seeing his bonus but the way they were trained, the scripts they were given etc.

 

Whiplash is a joke over here purely because of the amount of phantom passengers people claim for. There are calls for further work to be done to reduce it, not just the referral fees, such as having a requirement to have medical proof (Xrays etc) and the claim registered within 3 days. This has been adopted to great effect in places like Sweden where the amount of claims for whiplash is a fraction of what we have here.

 

Anyway, back to PPI. I think it differs from quick quid et al as they are very upfront about the costs, the APR and as such they are not mis-selling anything. Morally bankrupt? Maybe.

 

 

I do work in Insurance and Swinton have just had a £7.4m fine for the way they sold add-on policies (legal, personal accident and breakdown insurance) to their customers. The way their scripts were set out the customer was always lead to the top level of cover. I imagine PPI was the same, not just the slimy salesman seeing his bonus but the way they were trained, the scripts they were given etc.

My staff were encouraged to sell ppi with personal loans because they got points towards the branch target which along with other things helped towards bonuses (hundreds rather than millions). The problem was not dishonesty on behalf of my staff as they genuinely believed that they were helping the customer should he/her get into trouble with repayments because of redundancy or similar. The problem was, as always, the small print, which my staff were as ignorant about as the customers. So whilst the banks were undoubtedly culpable it was for the lack of training rather then a blanket con for the customer. There was and still remains a place for ppi but it's not for everyone.

As I said in a previous post add-ons in the retail industry is considered to be assumptive selling whereas in banking it became mis-selling. Same horse different rider.

I don't doubt that. When I was selling on the phone I was rewarded with points per sale and add on. I admit I will have sold when it was clear the customer wasn't sure of what they were adding on. If you pay 12k and allow uncapped commission though what do you expect.

 

Most financial services now are moving away from sales incentives so hopefully these stories are soon to be a thing of the past.