PPI and Court

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

In the middle of post 143 Bill dated 11 January 2010

[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

[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

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

Thanks, Turbo. Dammit, that letter is from the Service Review Team at the FOS, so all it is saying is that the Team itself doesn't check the calculations - they simply check procedures. I think we need to try and get the FOS Adjudication Team to clearly state exactly how far they go into the calculations. Maybe the email above could elicit an answer. Just maybe.......?

I missed the earlier FP comments about 78%, so well recalled. I wonder where they get the 78% from, now ? Maybe it's just a convenient figure which they can refer to as their own Rule of 78, and lead us into thinking it's the same thing.

[Bill-K]

Re: PPI and Court

...and thanks for posting up those letters, Marshy. It gives us some idea as to what is and isn't sufficient to get the FOS to uphold a claim.

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshy

I know you are worrying that they will suddenly claim a refund was given--but as we know--they have also got to acknowledge a Settlement figure was paid also.

It will still be more than PF's offer anyway ,as you know , the refund will be substantially less than the Settlement Figure therefore the projected refund in our letter would only slightly be reduced.

Anyway, lets forget about figures in this thread now until the Co-op produce the statements for the DSAR---the thread can then be about discussion re FOS conduct/responsibilities etc until then--where my mate Bill will no doubt subject us to his full oratory

--we'll still keep going by E-Mail of course with our figures & keep Bill in the loop.


Turbo

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

Thanks, Turbo. Dammit, that letter is from the Service Review Team at the FOS, so all it is saying is that the Team itself doesn't check the calculations - they simply check procedures. I think we need to try and get the FOS Adjudication Team to clearly state exactly how far they go into the calculations. Maybe the email above could elicit an answer. Just maybe.......?

I missed the earlier FP comments about 78%, so well recalled. I wonder where they get the 78% from, now ? Maybe it's just a convenient figure which they can refer to as their own Rule of 78, and lead us into thinking it's the same thing.

A pro rata rebate is a rebate/refund that is acceptable by the FSA being 78% of the unused PPI and 22% is seen as acceptable as being kept for admin etc.

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

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

But even then it is only 78% of the Premium and not the premium and the interest charged on it. This is actually paid back by the insurer and not the lender. ANY unfair rebate complaints (but first you have prove your rebate was unfair) are dealt with by the insurer.

[marshallka]

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

I was told by FOS that when a firm redress's by Goodwill it does not go against the firm in the complaints data.

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

indeed and no doubt why they all want to jump on the goodwill bandwagon rich in many cases would you not say

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

indeed and no doubt why they all want to jump on the goodwill bandwagon rich in many cases would you not say

But goodwill then can make the redress tax free

ex gratia payments of compensation and tax (depends how you interpret it!!!)

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/bulletins/tb72.htm

Ex-gratia or voluntary payment: It is sometimes suggested that an interest addition is not taxable because it, or the compensation on which it is calculated, is paid “ex-gratia” or voluntarily. We accept that a truly voluntary payment cannot be interest, even if described as such, because the essential feature of an entitlement to it is absent. In practice, however, we consider it will be extremely rare for any payment arising from claims that a financial product has been mis-sold to be truly voluntary, since the redress is given in consideration of the complainant giving up a right of action.

[nelliewops]

Re: PPI and Court

...and thanks for posting up those letters, Marshy. It gives us some idea as to what is and isn't sufficient to get the FOS to uphold a claim.

I agree Bill - Marshallka's posting of those FOS letter exerpts is most useful...........thanks Marshallka

Sorry, off topic I know as not Co-op related, but regarding a v.old LTSB PPI for which I only have start/end dates (full 7 year term paid!) - this probably indicates that FOS will be unable to help............

[pompeyfaith]

Re: PPI and Court

marshallka thanks for that and both offers i have had mention tax although i am under the impression tax will not apply to me as i am on IB and DLA and thus under the tax free allowance

[marshallka]

Re: PPI and Court

I agree Bill - Marshallka's posting of those FOS letter exerpts is most useful...........thanks Marshallka

Sorry, off topic I know as not Co-op related, but regarding a v.old LTSB PPI for which I only have start/end dates (full 7 year term paid!) - this probably indicates that FOS will be unable to help............

It would depend on if the firm actually has got records or indeed yourself like I did.

FOS could and most probably look into a "bank" complaint regardless of age as before the FOS came about in 2001 there was the old Banking Ombudsman Scheme which had rules, much the same as FOS on things like this.

It would though depend on records.

[Turboman]

Re: PPI and Court

Marshy--see Chatbox-lol