Tweet
Hi there, managed to finally get an offer out of these slippery little suckers. I don't think the calculation is right;
The gist of it is as follows;
Your CC was still open after Feb 2009, when it was transferred from HSBC to HBOS. HSBC has made us aware that your balance would have been £1,404.65 lower at the point it was transferred to HBOS had you not taken PPI. I've used this amount in my calculation to take into account any additional redress due.
The calculation then states this;
What your card balance would have been as at 30/04/2009 - £1,043.33
The difference between your balance with PPI and what your balance would have been without PPI - £1,043.33
Difference in payments made - £363.67
Indirect losses included in the above - £12.00
Plus compensatory interest - £1075.36
Less Tax (boo) - £215.07
Total payment due - £2267.79
Now, call me out for being totally stupid, but where is the figure from HSBC of £1404.65 in all this - I cannot see it anywhere? They say they've used it in the calculation, but they seem to have used a lower figure? I don't know if this is right or not? Can anyone help me and make sense of this calculation?
The gist of it is as follows;
Your CC was still open after Feb 2009, when it was transferred from HSBC to HBOS. HSBC has made us aware that your balance would have been £1,404.65 lower at the point it was transferred to HBOS had you not taken PPI. I've used this amount in my calculation to take into account any additional redress due.
The calculation then states this;
What your card balance would have been as at 30/04/2009 - £1,043.33
The difference between your balance with PPI and what your balance would have been without PPI - £1,043.33
Difference in payments made - £363.67
Indirect losses included in the above - £12.00
Plus compensatory interest - £1075.36
Less Tax (boo) - £215.07
Total payment due - £2267.79
Now, call me out for being totally stupid, but where is the figure from HSBC of £1404.65 in all this - I cannot see it anywhere? They say they've used it in the calculation, but they seem to have used a lower figure? I don't know if this is right or not? Can anyone help me and make sense of this calculation?
Comment