PPI and Court

[WendyB]

Re: PPI and Court

Blimey, am I ever going to get to bed?? Just had yet another look, and it's becoming clearer, or it's getting worse, can't make up my mind!

I understood that the loans were all "refinanced". In which case, that would mean that a portion of the second loan, for example, was used to pay off the first loan (hence all the argy bargy about settlemnt figures). If this is indeed the case, then I completely fail to see why the repayments on the second loan would be lower than those on the first? i.e, the balance of the first loan (ignoring PPI) would be about 3550. Add on loan 2 of 3000, gives a total (new) loan of 6500. Yet the payments are lower than those of Loan 1, which was for a smaller amount?.

If, however, Loan 2 was just an additional loan, rather than a refinance, this would explain things. As in if Loan 1 was settled by other means, say, by a remortgage. This would put a whole new complexion on matters wouldn't it?

A quick look at the spreadsheets reveals you've treated each loan as a separate, stand alone loan. But if any of the loans were refinancing the one before, then this would mean the spreadsheets would be incorrect, wouldn't it, as the starting figure would be wrong. I seem to remember in an earlier post Pompey said that some loans were refinances, and some were settled by other means, such as remortgage. I think you'd need to know which were which, as it could have a considerable impact on the amoritisation and final figures.

And on that note I am finally off to bed, if the above is complete rubbish please let me know, and put me straight!

And ps. only just noticed your compliment about "fairly knowledgable poster" - thanks muchly, but I don't think I'd go quite that far.......:tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

I've not looked at the amortisation spreadies that Turbo has posted, yet, but I think the reason why we need the settlement figure(s) may not quite have been grasped, here, Wendy.

What we REALLY need to know is how much of the loan advance for Loan 2 (et al...) is composed of PPI. Simplistic example, if I may...

Loan 1.
£4000 plus £1000 PPI = total loaned £5000.
Therefore, 20% of each and every payment is PPI.
If 10 payments of £200 were made, then we paid £400 in PPI, which we now reclaim (plus 8%)
If the settlement of loan 1 was £4000, then we have to treat this as a final loan repayment, in which case £800 of this was PPI

Loan 2.
£6000 plus £1500 PPI = total loaned £7500.
HOWEVER - £4000 of that loan was the settlement for loan 1, wasn't it ?
AND - of that £4000, £800 was PPI carried forward from loan 1, wasn't it ?
SO - the actual PPI in loan 2 was not £1500, but £2300.

...and this carries on throughout the sequence of loans.

So, unless we have a settlement figure, we don't have a PPI amount to carry forward.

There are further complications too - such as PPI rebates upon loan settlement. Sure - we don't really need to know the APR% (after we have amortised) - but we need to know the PPI apportionment, which changes with each loan.

Regarding the monthly repayments, these will be dependent upon the amount loaned AND the loan term. So (simplistically) - a loan (including interest) of £4800 over 48 months would require 48 payments of £100 - but the same loan over 60 months would only require £80 repayments.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

loan one was not refinanced i paid that one up early hence why loan two payment is lower

PF

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Just to reiterate on Bill's post re apportionment factors

In fact-there are always 2 loans --the cash advance & the PPI Loan

All our basic theory is in apportioning

1-Total Monthly Payment
2-Settlement Figures
3-Rebates (but not specific PPI REFUNDS)
4-Outstanding balances

in the direct ratio of either

PPI Loan divided by Total of Both Loans
or Cash Advance Loan divided by Total of both Loans

Ok--I'll expand on this in a separate thread later like I've done in PCF & PAG--but in the meantime I've started this basic summary spreadsheet so we (me in particular) can see the wood from the trees

I'll finish it later today -- and add the Co-Op data and info that me & Bill are coaxing out of Pompey re settlements & refinancing etc + any other useful figures in the thread when I read through it again

Turbo

[WendyB]

Re: PPI and Court

What we REALLY need to know is how much of the loan advance for Loan 2 (et al...) is composed of PPI. Yes I understand that, Bill. But all the loan amounts and PPI figures are shown separately on the Word doc which PF sent me..

Loan 1.
£4000 plus £1000 PPI = total loaned £5000.
Therefore, 20% of each and every payment is PPI.
If 10 payments of £200 were made, then we paid £400 in PPI, which we now reclaim (plus 8%)
If the settlement of loan 1 was £4000, then we have to treat this as a final loan repayment, in which case £800 of this was PPI

Loan 2.
£6000 plus £1500 PPI = total loaned £7500.
HOWEVER - £4000 of that loan was the settlement for loan 1, wasn't it ?
AND - of that £4000, £800 was PPI carried forward from loan 1, wasn't it ?
SO - the actual PPI in loan 2 was not £1500, but £2300.

...and this carries on throughout the sequence of loans. This is why I thought it would just be simpler to recalculate/amoritsie by taking out the PPI completely

So, unless we have a settlement figure, we don't have a PPI amount to carry forward. If we ignored the PPI we wouldn't need a PPI figure to carry forward.

There are further complications too - such as PPI rebates upon loan settlement. Sure - we don't really need to know the APR% (after we have amortised) - but we need to know the PPI apportionment, which changes with each loan. as above, if we knock out the PPI completely and work purely on the loan amounts, it has the effect of working out what the payments would have been without the PPI. i.e putting PF back to the position he would have been in if PPI had never been taken.

Regarding the monthly repayments, these will be dependent upon the amount loaned AND the loan term. So (simplistically) - a loan (including interest) of £4800 over 48 months would require 48 payments of £100 - but the same loan over 60 months would only require £80 repayments. Well that's obvious, isn't it. But as we have a Word doc with all the amounts, loans and PPI amounts, and terms, then this is calculable.

loan one was not refinanced i paid that one up early hence why loan two payment is lower. That makes perfect sense now, Pompey. Can you let us have details of which ones were refinanced (i.e the next loan paid off the loan before) and which ones were settled by other means? Any ones which you paid up early, by whatever means, do you have any info as to how much you paid to settle early?

PF

Bill, I'm not trying to be awkward or cloud the issue at all, but I think that, if we concentrated on the actual loan amounts without the PPI, then it would negate the need for having to work out how much of each loan payment was apportioned to PPI. Just, simply, how much should the loan have been, how much was paid, and so on, till the end. Then simply take the amount which should have been paid, from the amount that was paid, and that would give the refund figure expected.

Maybe I am being too simplistic here, but my principle for maths has always been to keep it as simple as possible, and remove things that don't need to be there. There is usually more than one way of arriving at the same answer. I suppose, in a way, that I am classing the PPI as a bit of a "Red Herring". So on that basis I am ignoring it until it needs to come into play. We'll probably get to the same answer in the end, mine is just a different way of working it out. ( Inever was a conformist!)

[WendyB]

Re: PPI and Court

On the basis of now knowing that the first loan was settled, rather than refinanced, this is how I see it

Loan amount 4650. Payments according to s/s apportioned to loan amount 108.21

Total payments made 19 x 132.98 2526.62
Payments without PPI inc 19 x 108.21 2055.99
Overpayment/refund due 470.93

Do you see what I'm getting at? Do this for each loan, and get to a figure at the end...


Balance on the loan at the point you repaid it would have been 3510.38, not including PPI. In effect that you've borrowed 1140, cos you've paid the remaining 3510 back.
Of course, this is taking it to a very simple level and doesn't take into account that if you had borrowed 1100 or so over 19 months the payments would have been different.

Bringing in the settlement figure which you paid, this is where Bill and Turbo's thinking on settlement figures come into play, because the settlement you paid would (or could) have had an element of PPI in there, so you'd be paying for something you never had....possibly.
But then, if they had rebated it, then you wouldn't have paid for it. Does that make sense?

I'll mooch back over your posts to see if the figures are there, may edit this shortly - or delete completely if I decide I'm completely wrong, or it's a complete load of rubbish.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

indeed and the amount on bill and turbos SS is £470.63 so about right there or about's

The amount on the offer letter is £445.92 with stat interest of £360.84 brings it to £806.76.

PF

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Wendy

I'm not ignoring your posts-I can't just can't keep up with the pace while doing my own thing trying to produce a summary of all the info, while at same time checking our PPI SS's---I will come back to your posts later tonight hopefully.

By the way, the Amort SS I posted can be converted to just PPI by entering

+C7 in cell G6 and
+C13 in cell K6

but I always work with the total loan & then apportion as shown on my summary sheet-because usually rebates & settlement figures are given for the total loan and then I can compare easily to work out Admin Charges/Penalty Interest etc

or convert it to just Loan similarly

+C6 in cell G6 and
+C12 in cell K6

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

I appreciate your concern, Wendy, but it is good to be able to discuss this stuff, rather than just have Turbo and I dictate everything. The true nature of a forum - and it is important to question stuff. Turbo and I have worked with PPI for a while now, and I guess we have become so attached to our own methods and spreadies that we find it hard to think any other way. So, I apologise for appearing a bit 'blinkered' !!![

On the basis of now knowing that the first loan was settled, rather than refinanced, this is how I see it

Loan amount 4650. Payments according to s/s apportioned to loan amount 108.21

Total payments made 19 x 132.98 2526.62
Payments without PPI inc 19 x 108.21 2055.99
Overpayment/refund due 470.93

Do you see what I'm getting at? Do this for each loan, and get to a figure at the end...

I think I see the simplicity, but as PF has pointed out, the £470.93 is NOT the sum total being claimed. There is a further approx. £400 to be added to this in the form of compensatory interest @ 8%, and this has to be calculated on each monthly PPI payment made, from the date of the payment. I can't see how this can be calculated if we are removing the PPI from the equation.

Bringing in the settlement figure which you paid, this is where Bill and Turbo's thinking on settlement figures come into play, because the settlement you paid would (or could) have had an element of PPI in there, so you'd be paying for something you never had....possibly.

The £4314.10 amortised balance at the time of loan settlement would quite possibly be a lot less than the amount required to settle the loan, due to the addition of Early Redemption Charges. I think we would need to try and estimate what the ERC's would have been, if we really can't find out how much PF actually paid to settle the loan.
If PF settled the loan himself - as opposed to consolidating it into loan 2, then the settlement payment would indeed contain an element of PPI which should be refunded - again with an additional 8% on top of that.
However, if loan 2 was taken out when loan was settled, then we could consider a further option, in that we could consider that £3000 of the loan 1 settlement was paid by this loan, in which case a portion of that £3000 would be PPI carried forward to loan 2. The remainder of the loan 1 settlement payment would then contain a smaller amount of PPI, which should be refunded (plus 8%)

But then, if they had rebated it, then you wouldn't have paid for it. Does that make sense?

It does, but the PPI rebate is never a refund of the full amount - in fact it is usually a paltry amount. We simply subtract it from the total PPI being reclaimed.

I'll mooch back over your posts to see if the figures are there, may edit this shortly - or delete completely if I decide I'm completely wrong, or it's a complete load of rubbish.

Whatever the outcome of our discussion, Wendy, I think it would be a good exercise to run both methods alongside each other, and compare the final results. As you say, you may just be arriving at the same result by a different route, and I'm just not grasping your method properly.

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Pompey

I see in chat that you are accepting the offer (due to reply 4th Oct)

I genuinly believe you should hang on a couple of days

ie You are being offered £806 for the Loan 1 (80)---which is the PPI Pymnts made + 8%

However, you probably paid around £4300 to settle the loan of which amounts to £801 PPI with 8% interest of £639.58

IE--you should be getting around £2,270 NOT £806

Same with the rest

Believe me---you are being taken to the cleaners

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

I agree with Turbo, PF - and in fact I reckon the claim is probably worth over £2,500, because the settlement figure would have been higher than the £4314.10 we are working on.

If there is any way you can find out what you paid to settle the loan, we can nail this tonight. Didn't you say you had records of the Co-Op current account to prove what payments you made ? Surely, the settlement payment would have been made from this account ?

But even if we use the £4314.10 above, you'd be throwing away £1500.

Don't do it, mate.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Guys, i am well aware that they are exercising damage limitation why do you think this has taken 2 yrs thus far and tried there best to hide the first agreement and then when one of there employees sent it by mistake via a second request and then told a pack of lies as to why no redress could be added indeed i trust them no further than i can swing a cat and as for setting moorcroft on me they hold no bounds i will phone the fos in the morning and get the date extended ok as i really do appriciate the work everyone is doing on this and owe it to you all that we nail it
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
i do not care if this takes another 8 or so weeks so if you like i can send of another dsar requesting the info we need to get to the bottom of this as i have no statements and the bank must keep them
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
if this offer is wrong that would be twice now that the fos has said the offer is fair and i should accept discusting and i am going to make sure the independant assesor investigates it

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Guys, i am well aware that they are exercising damage limitation why do you think this has taken 2 yrs thus far and tried there best to hide the first agreement and then when one of there employees sent it by mistake via a second request and then told a pack of lies as to why no redress could be added indeed i trust them no further than i can swing a cat and as for setting moorcroft on me they hold no bounds i will phone the fos in the morning and get the date extended ok as i really do appriciate the work everyone is doing on this and owe it to you all that we nail it

Excellent PF--that deficiency was only Loan 1 by the way

You could say you are unhappy with the lack of Statements provided for Loans 1 to 8 in order to verify their figures--this should have been sent with the SAR--then ring up co-op & demand them.

I need to re-read the thread and we need to amend our SS for the estimated Settlement figures you probably paid to close the loan in order for us to get the true scale of the scam.

Tell me again which Loans were Settled by paying off the balance
and which ones were merely closed and the balance included in a subsequent loan

Heres a typical verified case SS from Nelliepops thread to illustrate where we are going---note line 10--this is where the big sums come from and massive 8% figure (this is where you are missing out)

Turbo

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

Thanks for that PF.

Here's my suggestion, FWIW.

Don't get the offer deadline extended - there's no need.

Tell the FOS that it is unacceptable for two reasons.

The first reason is that the Co-Op has not provided an understandable explanation of how they calculated the offer. All they have provided is sub-totals. There is NO explanation as to how these totals were arrived at. The FOS guidelines stipulate that an explanation of the calculations should be given, so this offer is NOT in keeping with those. You cannot be expected to properly evaluate the offer with the information you have been given.

Secondly, that you are expecting approx. three times what the Co-Op has offered, and that their calculation is clearly wrong.

We then set about trying to get the actual settlement figure for the loan (from your current account records, or wherever). If this deffo cannot be found, then we work out an estimated settlement figure, based on the settlement figures which we DO have.

We then have a finished claim, and can tell them how much we are expecting, and how we have calculated it. They will only be able to prove us wrong if they can come up with the correct figures - which would put them in breach of the DPA, because they should have sent these with the DSAR. Unless they can supply proof to the contrary, it will HAVE to be assumed that the loan was settled - thus forcing acceptance of our calculations.

If we let them get away with this one, then IMO we will be making it harder to get them to accept our figures with the subsequent claims.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

lets remember the offer is as per fos guidelines for calculating redress whether that is right or not i am not sure but if it is wrong the only way i can enforce is via civil court which does not bother me because they have already made two offers and at least at court i would get a fair outcome if they do not hold there hands up before then
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
TB,BILL,

Good plan guys i will go with that and as the A team says love it when a plan comes together!!!!

On my mobile at the moment but will now have a search in my arcives at home and see if i can find anything else and return to my pc soon as the wife gets off lol