Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

[Bill-K]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

Thanks for getting that for us, EXC. So, we seem to have a 70% increase in the cost of taking a claim to FOS - and I guess that cost is the only criterion which is taken into the reckoning, these days. The value of 'goodwill' is negligible, it seems - as is loyalty.

LTSB have reckoned that the average PPI refund is £1200, as I recall. The cost of challenging this is now going to be £850, then (from 01/04/12). This will, I am sure, be good news for those with smaller claims - but it may make the larger claims harder to win - because the 'focus' is effectively being shifted.

[EXC]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

The recently published FOS board minutes confirm their plans to impose a supplemental £350 charge (in addition to the £500 case fee) for PPI complaints.

One would hope that this really would encourage banks to uphold more complaints and avoid them going to the FOS.

Also of interest is that the banks appear to have told the FOS to expect a ''significant increase'' in PPI complaints to the FOS this year.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...dminutes11.pdf

[MBD23]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

What a year it has been.

I wonder how much more if has left though. People say 12 months. But they have been saying that for 4 years

[Paul210]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

Website says aviemore funding ltd but address is a Bank of Scotland one, contact details as below from http://www.marbles.com/content.aspx?dsid=618

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I make a complaint about the way that my PPI was sold?
If you have a query about the way that your PPI was sold you can ring a dedicated telephone line for PPI customers.
0845 602 7795
If you prefer to write, the address for correspondence is:
Card Services
Complaints Resolution Team
Pitreavie Business Park
Dunfermline
Fife
KY99 4BS

[k77mss]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

hi guys could anyone help me does hbos own marbles credit card sent my complaint 18 weeks ago spoke to guy when it was 16 weeks he told me they do own it then when i phoned last week he had doubts that they do own it i hope i've not wasted all this time for nothing :tinysmile_cry_t: thanks for any replies

[dogtired]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

For once a result! Just had a cheque from M and S money just in time for Christmas!
Taken since July though.:santa1::santa1:
D

[leclerc]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

Interesting to read the above article especially the comments, one allegedly from a former employee of Lloyds:

"I left Lloyds almost a year ago. They now have 160,000 in the queue."

[Angry Cat]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

Fobbed off...again: Banks set to miss deadline on paying billions of compensation for mis-sold PPI insurance ¿ but they do have A MILLION complaints to cope with | Mail Online

[EXC]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

Yet another PPI case fails in court.

The case summary neatly reflects my view that taking PPI disputes to court in favour of FOS is flawed and dangerous:

''It is also welcome that Mr & Mrs Williams’ reliance on DISP was dismissed. We firmly believe that a borrower has an option: he or she can go to the Financial Ombudsman Service (“FOS”) or go to the Court instead. The FOS service is free for customers to use. If a claim is made to FOS, then FOS will determine using their “fairness” criteria which allows it a wide discretion. FOS had can take account of the FSA principles and also consider the latest version of DISP rather than the version that was in force when the sale took place. On the other hand the Courts have to determine disputes on the law, using the Civil Procedure Rules and after considering the evidence which will be tested at a trial by cross-examination. If claimants do not come up to proof their claims will be dismissed with costs. A Court will look at the rules in force at the time of the sale and a court cannot give retrospective effect to either the present version of DISP or the FSA’s Policy Statement PS 10/12.''

But try telling that to JudgeFodder.

[k77mss]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

It's LloydsBankingGroup so email him and you'll get the right response from their executive team.

Ok, because Antonio Osorio is on sick leave then you need to go through Tim Tookey who is acting CEO.

tim.tookey@lloydsbanking.com

thanks for that

[leclerc]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

sorry for HBOS thanxs

It's LloydsBankingGroup so email him and you'll get the right response from their executive team.

Ok, because Antonio Osorio is on sick leave then you need to go through Tim Tookey who is acting CEO.

tim.tookey@lloydsbanking.com

[k77mss]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

For lloydsTSB, right?

sorry for HBOS thanxs

[leclerc]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

hi guys anybody know antono horta-osorio email address thanxs

For lloydsTSB, right?

[k77mss]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

hi guys anybody know antono horta-osorio email address thanxs

[EXC]

Re: Latest Update on PPI Judicial Review - NO APPEAL - get your claims in......

The danger of ill advised Litigation:

"Mr Best’s evidence was “very vague about the interview he had with Mr Waller. His answers were often contradicted by written documents he had been given or sent”;"
http://www.lexology.com/library/deta...5-1055cc3bab2d

It seems that where the claimants evidence is less than watertight the courts tend to rely on the defendant firms procedures, in other words the onus lies on the claimant to demonstrate procedures were not followed rather than on the defendant to proove that they were. Poor quality claimant evidence ssems to be a recurring theme throughout current cases against Black Horse,

Theres a lot of these cases getting much further than they should be based on current case law, not that the legal teams mind, no doubt they have the benefit of ATE cover in place. That doesnt however help the poor souls who follow advice from CAG and issue themselves.

I totally agree.

AFAIK there has only been literally a handful of PPI cases ever won in court and I don't ever recall a CAG claimant being successful.

The barrister in the Best case, John Pugh, takes cases on a CFA basis and like CAG despite the rosey picture he paints on his website the current law was simply not designed with PPI in mind Overview of PPI Litigation