Hello,
I've noticed a few PPI questions on here but non that seem to cover what I want to know so here's my question if anyone could help?I
'm just querying how long a claims handler can claim access to monies after the initial claim has been refused and case closed?
In short, PPI claim made via handler, was refused. Advised to use ombudsman but did not want to go down that route (too much to deal with at the time). Case closed.
Almost two years later, Barclays (original bank in respect of claim) decided that they were going to re-open the case and have since decided to pay out which had nothing to do with the claims handler but they are still claiming their 30% plus VAT which I want to dispute due to them not actually doing the work to get the money back.
My theory (based on old business law course from a few years ago) is that the contract ended between the two parties the day the initial case was closed and we did not want to go via ombudsman route. The fact that Barclay's have decided to re-open the case themselves is nothing to do with the claims handler. Would this be correct or am I fighting a loosing battle?
Many thanks in advance.
K
I've noticed a few PPI questions on here but non that seem to cover what I want to know so here's my question if anyone could help?I
'm just querying how long a claims handler can claim access to monies after the initial claim has been refused and case closed?
In short, PPI claim made via handler, was refused. Advised to use ombudsman but did not want to go down that route (too much to deal with at the time). Case closed.
Almost two years later, Barclays (original bank in respect of claim) decided that they were going to re-open the case and have since decided to pay out which had nothing to do with the claims handler but they are still claiming their 30% plus VAT which I want to dispute due to them not actually doing the work to get the money back.
My theory (based on old business law course from a few years ago) is that the contract ended between the two parties the day the initial case was closed and we did not want to go via ombudsman route. The fact that Barclay's have decided to re-open the case themselves is nothing to do with the claims handler. Would this be correct or am I fighting a loosing battle?
Many thanks in advance.
K
Comment