PPI and Court

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

Glad you found my few words useful, guys - and well done for the extra stuff added, Turbo. That letter referred to in the final para - I think that could be a very important document, as it seems to clarify some of the fuzziness of the FOS guidelines, as illustrated by Wendy earlier. Have we got a scan of it here ?

I have to admit that Turbo and Marshy have been whizzing away with the figures so fast, that I'm left standing with my mouth open !!! Glad I could do a bit of 'verbal,' at least !!!

We do at least seem to have a bit more going for us on this one than Marshy had with hers, in that we have the admission that the loan existed, and that repayments were made on it. We have an offer which is clearly based on a specific no. of repayments - and thus an implied admission that the Co-Op has records of those repayments. If the Co-Op now says that they have no record that the loan was settled - ie., they have a record of all the earlier repayments, but not the final one - then I think it would be a fair and reasonable assumption that the loan WAS settled, if for no other reason than the overwhelming circumstantial evidence. As PF points out, the fact that the second loan was arranged IMMEDIATELY after the final recorded payment on the first loan suggests undeniably that the first loan was settled. In fact, it could probably be argued that the second loan was used to repay part of the first loan - but for the extra £140 I estimate this would gain us, I would keep it simple and separate, as we are doing.

With regard to alleging that PPI refund offers are 'Goodwill' payments, I believe we can even argue against that. "Considering the Co-Op's conduct in dealing with PF thus far - including the refusal to comply with a legitimate and lawful DSAR - they have demonstrated that they are incapable of showing goodwill, and unwilling to exercise it. Indeed, it is neither an asset which the Co-Op values or possesses, nor a currency which they deal in."

Marshallka - I was wondering about the PPI rebate calculations, and thought perhaps there was some inverse Rule of 78 which they used. So it's just a straight 78% then ? Is that consistent across a number of rebates ? Excellent and well done if it is. Never thought it would be that easy-peasy !!!!

Hiya Bill, I have tested my rebates today like this and they work as 78% of unused PPI (only the premium without interest that is).

This is why I say that Co-op at least gave pro rata rebates and firms like FIrstplus do not.

Also just found my FOS letter about my loan in 1997 that has no records....Also I remember now they had none for my 1999 loan (but I found them later!!!) so they did redress


This is from FOS to us

Co-operative bank has now told it would be prepared to make the following offer

"Firstly, the information provided by ************ does indicate that the loan taken out in August 1999 was settled in Jan 2001. It also confirms the amount of the settlement and refund made in respect of PPI at the time of settlement. ALthough we do not have information regarding the monthly repayments made to this loan, as a gesture of goodwill, I am prepared to accept that all the repayments, including the one due to 21st Jan 2001 were made. As this information will enable me to calculate the amount of the refund applicable I am prepared to arrange a refund and would appreciate it if you could inform ****** of this.

Turning to the loan taken out in 1997, although ******* advised this was consolidated by the loan taken out in 1999, it still remains the case that we have no details of how many repayments were made, how much the settlement figure wa or the amount of PPI refund provided at settlement.
In fact there is no evidence t confirm the loan was even taken out - we only have an agreement form, which could actually have been cancelled. In view of this, it would be impossible to calculate a refund and it would be inappropiate to accede to ********* request to "just offer some sort of redress".

The FOS go on to say

The business does not have records from this period and would not expect it to. However if you have further information in relation to the first loan, please let me have it so I can pass it to the business.


AND JUST WORKED THEIR PRO RATA REBATES AND it is EXACTLY 73% AND NOT 78% on one loan and about 76% on another!!!!

And with one loan that was only used for 5 months they gave me a rebate of about 85%...this was the early 1999 one

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshallka - I was wondering about the PPI rebate calculations, and thought perhaps there was some inverse Rule of 78 which they used. So it's just a straight 78% then ? Is that consistent across a number of rebates ? Excellent and well done if it is. Never thought it would be that easy-peasy !!!!

Come to think of it Bill--in a lot of our Firstplus involvement--they often state that (after a first complaint about a measly PPI refund) that they have now upped it to 78% in the hope that the customer will be satisfied

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

In the middle of post 143 Bill dated 11 January 2010

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

bill,

Thank you your words do not go amiss on this thread and i agree that the word "goodwill"is over used and in many cases wrongly used not only by the co-op but by the financial industry as a whole

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

Glad you found my few words useful, guys - and well done for the extra stuff added, Turbo. That letter referred to in the final para - I think that could be a very important document, as it seems to clarify some of the fuzziness of the FOS guidelines, as illustrated by Wendy earlier. Have we got a scan of it here ?

I have to admit that Turbo and Marshy have been whizzing away with the figures so fast, that I'm left standing with my mouth open !!! Glad I could do a bit of 'verbal,' at least !!!

We do at least seem to have a bit more going for us on this one than Marshy had with hers, in that we have the admission that the loan existed, and that repayments were made on it. We have an offer which is clearly based on a specific no. of repayments - and thus an implied admission that the Co-Op has records of those repayments. If the Co-Op now says that they have no record that the loan was settled - ie., they have a record of all the earlier repayments, but not the final one - then I think it would be a fair and reasonable assumption that the loan WAS settled, if for no other reason than the overwhelming circumstantial evidence. As PF points out, the fact that the second loan was arranged IMMEDIATELY after the final recorded payment on the first loan suggests undeniably that the first loan was settled. In fact, it could probably be argued that the second loan was used to repay part of the first loan - but for the extra £140 I estimate this would gain us, I would keep it simple and separate, as we are doing.

With regard to alleging that PPI refund offers are 'Goodwill' payments, I believe we can even argue against that. "Considering the Co-Op's conduct in dealing with PF thus far - including the refusal to comply with a legitimate and lawful DSAR - they have demonstrated that they are incapable of showing goodwill, and unwilling to exercise it. Indeed, it is neither an asset which the Co-Op values or possesses, nor a currency which they deal in."

Marshallka - I was wondering about the PPI rebate calculations, and thought perhaps there was some inverse Rule of 78 which they used. So it's just a straight 78% then ? Is that consistent across a number of rebates ? Excellent and well done if it is. Never thought it would be that easy-peasy !!!!

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Ok letter emailed have marked it high priority and requested a read receipt.

PF

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...onvenience.htm

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Have amended post 324 in last few sentences---Bill--what do you think ?? EDIT--and again re Dept Manager (wait 2 mins Turbo or you'll be Automerged--lol)

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshy

The first offer letter of 27/10/2008 (without Loan 1 included) includes "as a gesture of goodwill" but not the revised one of 24/8/2010

Turbo

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

I have added to Bill's draft the bit re their guidelines in italics- + last para re time extension-will look up the bit re FOS checking

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir,

I write with reference to the PPI refund offer on loan account 80, made by the Co-Op in their letter of 24/08/10.

In your guidelines at the end of your letter of 20th September 2010, you state that the financial business must

1--recalculate the loan and the payments to what they would have been if the consumer had taken the loan without PPI
2--repay to the consumer the amounts by which the payments actually made exceeded the recalculated payments
3--pay the consumer interest on each of these amounts at 8% simple inttrest from the date each payment was made to the date the compensation was paid
4--set out in writing for the consumer details of the calculations

If the FOS considers its' offer of £806.76 to be fair and reasonable, then the FOS must clearly have checked their calculations in order to arrive at this conclusion.

That being the case, I cannot understand how it can be considered fair and reasonable to completely overlook the PPI paid as part of the final settlement of that loan, and I respectfully request that you look into this.

Assuming that you will be re-checking your calculations, I will try and assist you with the following details of the loan:

Date of Agreement : 9/3/1999
Date of first payment: 9/4/1999

Total Monthly payment: £132.98, which comprises
Monthly Payment Cash Loan: £108.21
Monthly Payment PPI Loan: £24.77 (18.63% of the total loan advance)

18 Total Payments made of £132.98= £2,393.64 (Co-op letter of 24/8/2010 states £2,393.56), and therefore
18 PPI Payments made of £24.77= £445.86 (Co-op letter of 24/8/2010 states £445.92)

The Co-op has offered £445.92 + 8% interest on each payment = £360.84 (calculated up to February 2010 ) = £806.76.

However, the Co-Op appears to have completely overlooked the final payment to close the loan, which would have been calculated by the Stewart Rule of 78 Calculator - as used by the Co-Op.

This comes to £4,486, of which that part attributable to the PPI part of the agreement is £835.75(18.63%). This would further attract 8% interest from the date of settlement, amounting to £626.83 as at 24/8/2010.

Therefore, in my estimation, the correct refund should be £806.76 (as offered) + £835.75 + 626.83 = £2,269.34 PLUS a further £52.33 in compensatory interest to bring the claim up to date as of 06/10/10, amounting to £2321.67 and increasing by £0.28 per day thence from.

This seems to be a fair and reasonable calculation, and unless you can show otherwise, I formally request that you direct the Co-Op to make a revised offer along these lines.

I also request that you consider directing a further compensatory payment, bearing in mind that the Co-Op's offer is either a deliberate and unforgiveable attempt to defraud me, or a genuine - but equally unforgiveable - error.

As regards the extension to the time period, this is entirely dependent on how long the Co-Op take to fulfil the DSAR legal requirements to furnish me with the actual loan statements.

There is another particular issue that concerns me.

Namely, that in a letter from FOS by David Lydiate dated 11th January 2010 , it was stated " .. it is not my role to consider whether the offer made by the firm is correct or or not"
I would be grateful if you would pass this letter, and the letters I sent to the Co-op yesterday, to your Dept Manager for a detailed reply-rather than the constant reply from adjudicators of "..it is within FOS guidelines".

Thankyou.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Morning TM thank you

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

and the only reason i managed to get a copy was because i made a second request to another coop address yup the beauty of many bods dealing with the same complaint

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Was this loan FIRST refused due to them not having records?

The redress they have offered is actually JUST the PPI repayments made against the loan being 18 x 24.77? Did they say to PF that they did not have a record of the settlement of this loan being 1999?

Also was this offered by Goodwill?

Morning all

That's right Marshy--but it wasn't mentioned goodwill in letter of 24/8/2010

Thanks Bill-your superior oratory skills are much needed.

I'll dig the bit out of PF's FOS letter re the "the lender should calculate...." etc & perhaps add that to the letter + I'll find the bit about them not being responsible for checking (if I originally interpreted it right)

We also need to reply that the amount of time we need is entirely dependent on the Co-Op meeting the legal requirements of a formal DSAR for the statements

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

And just for anyones reference I have just checked how co-op work their "insurance rebates" out. They rebate 78% of the "unused" PPI (without interest). (Pro rata rebate!!).

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

well all i have is a signed copy no original and no proof of payments made but they accepted on the grounds above so is worth another go marshy