PPI and Court

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

the letter bill posted is that an ok to email to the fos ?

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

how did you pay it via DD from a coop account ? If you did not pay it you would not have got a second loan as you would have defaulted on the first

If it was from a coop account you can bet that they would have taken payments from it regardless whether the funds where there or not marshy start a thread on this so the very good ppi team we have here can pull this appart

I have proof of the agreement sent to us and we have a "copy" of this signed. I do not have proof of paying it (not got statements going back to 1997) and as regards the loan after, it was taken out some two years later (the first loan was over 5 years) so I assumed we actually took out another loan then and paid off the first loan with the second loan... they have no proof and we don't either.

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

the letter bill posted is that an ok to email to the fos ?

It seems OK to me PF and as yet this is what we know to be the correct figures although as Co-op are saying they have not got records going back this far, and you do not have a settlement statement either they may come back and state that that is their final offer and FOS will agree like they did with mine. (although at least you have had then refund the payments made).

They may also come back with your statements whereby they can prove that a rebate was applied (and this is why they are offering such a low payment compared to the one where no rebate was applied)... who knows but you have definately given it your all and are continuing to do so.

If this loan was paid off with the second loan you had (like mine) then maybe they will find the cheque they actually sent to you (being the opening balance of the second loan less the closing balance of the first loan).

[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

[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!!).

[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

[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

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

Morning TM thank you

[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.

[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

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)

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

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

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

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

PF

[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

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