• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Banks challenge new PPI rules

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • nelliewops
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    Originally posted by pompeyfaith View Post
    dont quote me on this nellie but i believe as yours has been upheld by an ombudsman and thus the JR does not apply to you as it was upheld on the current rules and not the ones to be implemented on the 1st december i see no reason why you cant
    Thanks PF - I won't take it as gospel, but it does make sense, so hopefully you are right..........it would just be good to find something somewhere in black and white to back this up though
    ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
    Originally posted by NLP View Post
    we must not let people think about continuing to claim, i read elsewhere and i agree entirely, if the banks refute every single claims while the JR is taking place, they will just end up paying tons of money for every case kicked to the FOS.

    surely this will cost them more money in the long-term?

    so we must continue...even more so than ever.
    Well said NLP - the more we can cost the banks over this, the better!
    Last edited by nelliewops; 10th October 2010, 09:44:AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

    Leave a comment:


  • pompeyfaith
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    good nite Di tc xx

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    Right calling it a night folks, see ya tomorrow, night night.X

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    Does anyone know anything about the Legal Ombudsman?

    found this on another site earlier today....

    http://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/

    (Sorry this is nothing to do with the subject on this thread)

    Right just checked, but this is if your not happy with the lawyer/solicitor that may have been dealing with your matters.

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    I think we should just take it in our stride, and just keep a check on what happens, but with the FSA and FOS on our sides - there is still strong hope for us.
    ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


    Thanks PF, I will now just, cheers for that X



    Why have i merged posts again? lol.
    Last edited by di30; 9th October 2010, 23:41:PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

    Leave a comment:


  • pompeyfaith
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    Di as you know plenty of good folk here to help you so without further ado start a thread and start the ball rolling xx

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    Very much so PF.

    They are only costing themselves more.



    Still takes me back to last week when receiving the additional refund from Lloyds lol.

    Leave a comment:


  • pompeyfaith
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    NLP exactly and every claim sent to fos costs them £450 so is in there interests to settle in the 8wks

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    Good points made NLP.

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    I may as well get them done with.

    My reasons are, it was a joint loan, hubby first account holder, they told him he must take the ppi to be accepted for the loans, yet when he tried making a reclaim they would not pay out, long story, but going to give it a go anyway.

    I must admit back then, we were very laid back on this LOL.

    Cheers folks.

    Leave a comment:


  • NLP
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    we must not let people think about continuing to claim, i read elsewhere and i agree entirely, if the banks refute every single claims while the JR is taking place, they will just end up paying tons of money for every case kicked to the FOS.

    surely this will cost them more money in the long-term?

    so we must continue...even more so than ever.

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    That is so true NLP, no harm in doing so, going to do it.
    ------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
    Originally posted by pompeyfaith View Post
    yep di start now you have nothing to lose eather way

    I will do, cheers PF.

    Di
    Last edited by di30; 9th October 2010, 23:26:PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

    Leave a comment:


  • pompeyfaith
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    yep di start now you have nothing to lose eather way

    Leave a comment:


  • di30
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&sou...scJ5yFkVimgEqw

    I don't know if I have posted the above link ok.

    In relation to binding decisions made by the ombudsman etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • NLP
    replied
    Re: Banks challenge new PPI rules

    di, why wait?

    the FOS and FSA have said business as usual... and if after 8 weeks they say no, give it to the FOS.

    Leave a comment:

View our Terms and Conditions

LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
Working...
X