Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

[ncf355]

Having gleaned various quality information from threads and some very helpful posters, it would seem a lot of PPI cases would have a very strong case for legal action (take for instance where secured loans have single premium policys added)

So why is such action not common, when at the moment (with no backlog due to bank charges cases or suchlike) the legal route would appear to be far, far better from a time perspective than the Bank>FoS approach?

Certainly in the case of many secured loan PPI's the amounts involved would easily put them in to the realms where No win, no fee assistance could be used and I would imagine a strong case could be argued for ATE insurance against the lenders costs should you lose?


:tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[leclerc]

Re: Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

NCF, i think it may not be usual on the forums because of the alleged hassle of doing a claim, the fact that it is not a templated approach, understanding the law and the regulations at the time, and the very fact of proving that a bank employee had said that it was compulsory/obligatory.

I know that the way loans were sold was geared towards non disclosure of the optional approach of PPI, ie you ask how much can you afford to pay, you use the word a loan fully protected costs x amount, etc, etc. However, unless the employee is willing to effectively get themselves sacked by saying we said x, y or z which they would have done due to the various strategies being sent from above them, then it is difficult to prove that aspect to it.

[ncf355]

Re: Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

OK, but in the case of Single premium, where the amount is added at the start, interest charged for the duration yet the protection runs out after 5 yrs?

That would be an easy argument surely?

[Mebestmatewes]

Re: Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

Morning
I have been looking into this today, as I want to make a claim, and wasn't sure if it was worth doing, given the fact lenders are not processing any new claims. It does look like there is the odd firm out there that are going down the legal rout with this process. Which would be superb as they will claim their fee back from the bank and I don't have to pay a portion of any award. I've not signed up yet as it does look too easy on first glance.

[leclerc]

Re: Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

OK, but in the case of Single premium, where the amount is added at the start, interest charged for the duration yet the protection runs out after 5 yrs?

That would be an easy argument surely?

Not particularly, if the loan is over 10 years and the protection is only 5 years there is nothing that the seller has to do to see if protection is in place should they lose their employment, unable to work because of illness etc, etc,

[cappo]

Re: Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

this is what the cmc i,m with appears to be in the process of doing ,i just want to get my cases sorted as i,ve got 6 of them and at the mo the poor old fos seems to be having a right rare time of it,don,t know if the court wouid frighten them any more than the fos but i,m thinking hopefully they might buckle before the actual court hearing date,don,t know with the banks anymore and don,t know what a win by the bba wouid mean for my cases as the cmc,s seem to only want to do the easy cases( don,t want to offend any cmc,s out there but this does seem to be the case)

[cappo]

Re: Legal action on PPI - why is it not common?

hi guys i posted on one of the offshoot forums (beagles still) about the fact of the tick boxes of the cap 1 agreement appearing to have been tampered with namely the tick boxes appear to have been ticked through the crosses only discovered this when my solicitors sent me a copy of agreement is this legal?