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

[di30]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

And straight from the horses mouth........

http://www.lloydstsb.com/payment_pro...complaints.asp

Payment Protection Insurance Complaints



We encourage our customers to talk to us about PPIPayment Protection Insurance Complaints

We’re sorry you have a complaint about Payment Protection Insurance (PPI), but we’re committed to making the journey as easy as possible.
It’s easy for you to complain to us directly so you don’t need to use a Claims Management Company (CMC) who will typically charge an up front fee or take a proportion of any compensation you may be due. We assess complaints sent directly to us in exactly the same way that we treat complaints from a Claims Management Company, so by coming direct you will not be disadvantaged.

Here's what you need to do:

1. Call or write to us

1. 
   At LloydsTSB we are committed to making it as easy as possible to resolve your complaint. We’d like to discuss the details of your case with you directly so your concerns can be resolved as quickly as possible. You can call us on 08453 005599, our dedicated number for PPI complaints or write to us at Lloyds TSB, Tredegar Park, Newport, NP10 8SB.
2. Download and complete a PPI Consumer Questionnaire Form
   If you decide you want to proceed with your complaint, download the
   PPI Consumer Questionnaire and fill in the details of your case. Filling in a PPI Consumer Questionnaire from the Financial Ombudsman Service helps us process your complaint as efficiently as possible.
3. Send it in
   Send the PPI Questionnaire to us at Lloyds TSB, Tredegar Park, Newport, NP10 8SB.We are committed to resolving complaints. We have employed additional new members of staff to help customers with their queries about PPI policies.

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.
08453 005599
If you prefer to write the address for correspondence is:
Lloyds TSB
Tredegar Park
Newport
NP10 8SB
If you are dissatisfied with our response and you wish to make a complaint please click the link below which will take you to the Financial Ombudsman Service website. This includes details of how to make a complaint and provides a questionnaire for you to complete. By filling out the FOS PPI Questionnaire we will have all of the information we need to assess your complaint. Once you have completed the form please send it directly to us at the address above.
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...notes/ppi.html

We encourage our customers to talk to us about PPI

• We are best placed to deal with any queries our customers have about their PPI policy
• Rather than talk to a CMC, you can find all of the information you need about raising a complaint about PPI on this page. You will receive exactly the same service by coming to us direct as you would from going through a CMC
• The easiest way to raise a query about a PPI policy is to complete a

• 
  PPI Consumer Questionnaire. Once you have completed the form please send it directly to us at the address above.

What does the Judicial Review mean for my PPI Complaint?
We are no longer participating in the Judicial Review or are part of how the British Bankers’ Association intends to respond to the High Court’s recent judgment.

We are now reassessing the complaints that we have already received and dealing with them in a swift and timely manner.

Those customers who have not complained but have concerns about their PPI policy should contact us directly using the details above.

[Paul210]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Indeed. My point was that in cementing the liability into the current accounts it's a recognition of the inevitability of it, rather than merely it being a potential liability.

Natwest results out tomorrow but by all accounts they won't include any PPI liability or any indication as to their position in respect of a JR appeal.

could be, although reading kleinman today the feeling seems to be the figure is overstated, could it be the banks withdraw support for bba to gain positive pr, its likely the bba will pursue anyway to try and avoid precedent of retrospective legislation in the industry. Menawhile they overstate the ppi liability in order to hike the pressure on the courts for any appeal, the thought being the more money there is riding on this the more likely the court is to allow an appeal and take it to SC.

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

its entered into the accounts for that period but the nature fo a provision is that its a future liability, it doesnt have to specify that it will be paid in the next quarter, or even within that finanical year.

Its not unusual for a provision to sit on accounts for several years before the liability is paid, so long as a provision in made at a time when the company became aware of the potential liability then the accounting standards are deemed to have been met.

Indeed. My point was that in cementing the liability into the current accounts it's a recognition of the inevitability of it, rather than merely it being a potential liability.

Natwest results out tomorrow but by all accounts they won't include any PPI liability or any indication as to their position in respect of a JR appeal.

[anaellie]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

With the noises coming out of Lloyds i cannot see how they can hide behind what actions the other banks may take in terms of an appeal. It seems clear cut that Lloyds are now going to deal with claims . This is a positive step forward

[di30]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

As over the road.......

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/new...i-legal-action

Lloyds Banking Group has admitted defeat and is pulling out of legal action to stop the multi-billion pound payout of payment protection insurance (PPI) compensation to mis-selling victims.
The UK's largest bank – which controls a third of the banking market – has set aside £3.2 billion in its interim results today to pay claims, admitting redress is appropriate in many cases.


The decision is a massive boost to consumers who for years were flogged PPI by bank salesmen, often under duress or where it was unsuitable for them.
The banks' trade body, the British Bankers' Association, lost the key judicial review in the High Court last month but may still appeal, which could drag the case on for years (see the Banks lose PPI case MSE News story).

It was trying to over turn Financial Services Authority (FSA) rules implemented last December that forced banks to review past sales of PPI that the watchdog initially estimated could lead to over £3 billion in compensation for consumers.
Despite the huge blow of the loss of its biggest member, the BBA says it is still considering whether to appeal.
A Lloyds spokesman says: "We will no longer be participating in the BBA's judicial review.

"We believe this draws a line under the issue. The £3.2bn represents our best estimate of the likelihood of customers redress plus administration costs as agreed with the regulators.
"Drawing a line under this issue does exactly that and is also in the interests of the long term stability of our business."

Massive victory
Dan Plant, MoneySavingExpert.com money analyst, says: "This is a massive victory and vindication of what consumers, and now the court, have been shouting loudly.
"Lloyds has finally seen sense, yet as millions of PPI policies have been mis-sold over years, the other massive institutions involved must now follow suit, own up that customers were badly treated and give the billions of pounds back.
"This is further evidence the illegitimate hold placed on claims must stop immediately, and hopefully the FSA will take strong action to make this happen.
"Anyone who thinks they may have been mis-sold a policy should immediately contact the bank, demanding the money back."

Not only is Lloyds' withdrawal significant, so too is the amount it's set aside. The FSA initially estimated a payout of £3 billion to those mis-sold in the past by the industry as a whole.
However, the fact Lloyds alone is setting aside £3.2 billion suggests this prediction is way off. Suggestions today indicate the true figure could be closer to £9 billion.

What are other banks doing?
Barclays and HSBC are not making any further comment on the matter.
We are still awaiting responses from Royal Bank of Scotland and the Co-operative Bank
Santander was never involved in the case.

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Exclusive: Banks split over whether to pursue appeal on payment protection insurance following Lloyds decision. Full story on my blog soon.

Mark Kleinman from SkyNews

Kleinman: Sky News' City editor brings you the inside track on the business stories that matter | Sky News Blogs

[Paul210]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

The provision has been made against the accounts for the first 3 months of this year and has contributed to them making a loss of £3.47b.

its entered into the accounts for that period but the nature fo a provision is that its a future liability, it doesnt have to specify that it will be paid in the next quarter, or even within that finanical year.

Its not unusual for a provision to sit on accounts for several years before the liability is paid, so long as a provision in made at a time when the company became aware of the potential liability then the accounting standards are deemed to have been met.

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

The provision has been made against the accounts for the first 3 months of this year and has contributed to them making a loss of £3.47b.

net loss is 2.44Bn

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

eventually, yes, but looks like may be at the end of any appeal process so provision is not even necessarily in for this year, once on their books is there for any point in future.

The provision has been made against the accounts for the first 3 months of this year and has contributed to them making a loss of £3.47b.

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

According to Robert Peston:

Update 09:54: Royal Bank of Scotland will not make a decision till next week on whether to join Lloyds in agreeing to settle PPI cases.

BBC - Peston's Picks: Lloyds to settle PPI claims

So much for the BBA announcing that they'll be appealing this week then.

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

eventually, yes, but looks like may be at the end of any appeal process so provision is not even necessarily in for this year, once on their books is there for any point in future.

For sake of playing devils advocate - Given Lloyds had to make other provisions which would have had a negative impact on share price anyway have they just though "lets put in a worst case scenario and get all bad news out in one go", means they have got the damage out of the way and can always reduce the provision in future which would artificially inflate any profit figures for future. - or am i just being cynical?

No, you are not being cynical... you are just understanding the game large corps play out day in day out.

For example... also news from Lloyds this morning.... haha

LONDON (Dow Jones)--Bad Irish property loans are continuing to drag on Lloyds Banking Group PLC (LYG), with the bank Thursday saying that virtually its entire property development portfolio is now considered impaired.
Presenting its first-quarter results, Finance Director Tim Tookey said about 60% of the overall, GBP27.6 billion Ireland portfolio is subject to losses, leading to a larger-than-expected GBP2.6 billion impairment charge across the bank.
Ireland accounted for GBP1.14 billion of Lloyds' quarterly charge. It said the figure allows for a further 10% fall in commercial real-estate prices from already-depressed levels

[Paul210]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

There are strict rules that govern provisions in the accounts of PLCs. The Board have to give an accurate and true reflection of their liabilities going forward. Decisions to include negative provisions such as this damage the share price and standing of a company and are not made lightly. So If Lloyds say their PPI liability will be £3.2b then that's what they genuinely think it's going to be.

eventually, yes, but looks like may be at the end of any appeal process so provision is not even necessarily in for this year, once on their books is there for any point in future.

For sake of playing devils advocate - Given Lloyds had to make other provisions which would have had a negative impact on share price anyway have they just though "lets put in a worst case scenario and get all bad news out in one go", means they have got the damage out of the way and can always reduce the provision in future which would artificially inflate any profit figures for future. - or am i just being cynical?

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Update: The City are obviously convinced Lloyds are paying out... as the shares are now down 8.8% !!!

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

good point, if the decision had been made this week not to appeal then surely this statment need not have been made, a provision in the accounts by itself would have been sufficient.

There are strict rules that govern provisions in the accounts of PLCs. The Board have to give an accurate and true reflection of their liabilities going forward. Decisions to include negative provisions such as this damage the share price and standing of a company and are not made lightly. So If Lloyds say their PPI liability will be £3.2b then that's what they genuinely think it's going to be.

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

What does this mean within their report?

Since publication of the judgment, the Group has been in discussions with the FSA with a view to seeking clarity
around the detailed implementation of the Policy Statement.