• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Debenhams ppi

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Debenhams ppi

    Hi need some advise. I had my first debenhams ppi claim rejected 3 years ago. Tried again 2 weeks ago and they have offered me redress straight away but not happy with the amount. They said pre 2005 they can see how much PPI was added to my account and the redress is fair but I worked out its £1.50 per £100 and have a statement showing 40 pounds in that month alone. They also said my complant against SCUKL is time barred aa 15 years has passed since point of sale. Dont understand any of it. Should I accept the offer or complain ?
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Do you know the reason that your claim was rejected 3 years ago? Had it gone to the ombudsman then or did you just deal with Debenhams directly ?

    Is this what the letter says ?
    Your complaint against SCUKL has been assessed under the general legal principles (including time-bar) whereas the FCAs dispute resolution 'DISP' rules apply to your complaint against the Insurer.
    We consider your complaint against SCUKL is time barred because under general legal principles, you have 15 years from the point of sale of the PPI to bring a mis-selling claim against SCUKL"
    So you have a statement showing you paid £40 PPI in one month ? ( was it a charge of £1.50 per £100 of the balance on the account ? so balance that month was around £2600 ? ) Any idea of generally the level of balance the card had ?
    #staysafestayhome

    Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

    Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi am.sorry just seen your post. I took my complaint to fos and they ruled in favour of debenhams

      Comment

      View our Terms and Conditions

      LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

      If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


      If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
      Working...
      X