Tweet
Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold
Nothing different as such or to what we already know - but this was posted on 18 March about banks intentially delaying PPI reclaims.
http://www.artsgrantsfinder.com/fina...ng-ppi-claims/
Hundreds of thousand of ppi claims from loan insurance will be put on hold for many months until legal battle ends. The British Bankers’ Association has announced that banks will postpone the old ppi claims relating to the sale of payment protection insurance (PPI). The cases is going to be dealt only if the conclusion of a judicial review has completed. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has revealed that ppi claims topped the list of complaints in the last financial year.
In August 2010, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) released a crackdown on the way banks along with other financial firms have been managing complaints about the mis-sold ppi policies. The City watchdogs required that banks along with other lenders will have to review old complaints about ppi claims and other ppi related issues. It ordered to follow fresh rules which were added on December 1.
The FSA expects its new rules to force financial services industry to deal with 2.75 million ppi claims and ppi associated cases and claimants could be refunded just as much as ¡Ì2.7bn. However, the British Bankers’ Association (BBA), which represents the High Street banks, called the new rules illegal and retrospective by applying new standards to their old sales. It announced lately that it was seeking a judicial review.
The BBA then states that any case that may be affected by the results of the said judicial review which can not be heard in the High Court until earlier this year will be put on hold. The BBA mentioned in its statement that the evaluation of the complaint will not be affected by the judicial review and these complaints will be handled in a normal way. However, if the complaint will be impacted by the judicial review, and cannot be resolved at this time, then banks will write to notify their customers.
FSA’s rules allowed these cases to be put on hold until the case was over. There also been no application for a waiver similar to the official hold on cases set up during the past legal arguments over unauthorized bank charges. However, this move is likely to add an additional aspect to the dispute, with the FSA saying that firms will be expected to continue handling ppi claims and other complaints while this process is ongoing. Also, complainants would still be eligible for take their cases to the Financial Ombudsman Office if the bank has not dealt with it within eight weeks of the initial complaint, even if the case is on hold.
The banks assume that FSA is acting beyond its powers in ordering them to offer compensation to their customers for past mis-selling under its general rules referred to as Principles of Business Sourcebook.
Nothing different as such or to what we already know - but this was posted on 18 March about banks intentially delaying PPI reclaims.
http://www.artsgrantsfinder.com/fina...ng-ppi-claims/
Hundreds of thousand of ppi claims from loan insurance will be put on hold for many months until legal battle ends. The British Bankers’ Association has announced that banks will postpone the old ppi claims relating to the sale of payment protection insurance (PPI). The cases is going to be dealt only if the conclusion of a judicial review has completed. The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) has revealed that ppi claims topped the list of complaints in the last financial year.
In August 2010, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) released a crackdown on the way banks along with other financial firms have been managing complaints about the mis-sold ppi policies. The City watchdogs required that banks along with other lenders will have to review old complaints about ppi claims and other ppi related issues. It ordered to follow fresh rules which were added on December 1.
The FSA expects its new rules to force financial services industry to deal with 2.75 million ppi claims and ppi associated cases and claimants could be refunded just as much as ¡Ì2.7bn. However, the British Bankers’ Association (BBA), which represents the High Street banks, called the new rules illegal and retrospective by applying new standards to their old sales. It announced lately that it was seeking a judicial review.
The BBA then states that any case that may be affected by the results of the said judicial review which can not be heard in the High Court until earlier this year will be put on hold. The BBA mentioned in its statement that the evaluation of the complaint will not be affected by the judicial review and these complaints will be handled in a normal way. However, if the complaint will be impacted by the judicial review, and cannot be resolved at this time, then banks will write to notify their customers.
FSA’s rules allowed these cases to be put on hold until the case was over. There also been no application for a waiver similar to the official hold on cases set up during the past legal arguments over unauthorized bank charges. However, this move is likely to add an additional aspect to the dispute, with the FSA saying that firms will be expected to continue handling ppi claims and other complaints while this process is ongoing. Also, complainants would still be eligible for take their cases to the Financial Ombudsman Office if the bank has not dealt with it within eight weeks of the initial complaint, even if the case is on hold.
The banks assume that FSA is acting beyond its powers in ordering them to offer compensation to their customers for past mis-selling under its general rules referred to as Principles of Business Sourcebook.
have you heard anything on the grapevine at all.:tinysmile_hmm_t2:
Delays: Chief Ombudsman Natalie Ceeney says that some banks are being less co-operative 
Comment