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

[leclerc]

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

No.

Might be untrue, but thought i would ask.

Budgie asked the question "where did you hear the rumour?"

[di30]

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

I was recently informed by Lloyds that I would hear an update by or before the 16 April, but I'm just expecting the usual response that many others been receiving.
I will post up the details when the letter is received.

[Budgie]

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

I just checked with listings office and NO DATE has yet been set for handing down

[cappo]

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

I just checked with listings office and NO DATE has yet been set for handing down

it,s a case of ear to the ground one of us on here is going to hear something sooner or later can,t be much longer now the pointer seems to be end of march-easter.

[EXC]

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

FOS minutes for board meeting held on 1 Febuary, published today.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...es-feb2011.pdf

The deputy decisions & legal director provided an update about the Judicial
Review hearing that had taken place between 25 and 28 January. She added
that judgment was expected within the next four to six weeks. The board
thanked the decisions director, the deputy decisions & legal director and their
teams for all the hard work they had put into making extensive preparations
for the hearing.

The board noted the ongoing discussions between the Ombudsman Service
and the FSA about how the new ‘section 404’ powers were to be used by the
FSA, particularly where used for a single firm redress approach.

It was noted that work towards achieving the key priorities for 2010/11 was
generally on track, and that progress had been made against key indicators.
The break-even financial position for the third quarter was noted (excluding
the one off payment to an exiting contractor), although the board also noted
that this would be under pressure in future months given firm behaviour over
payment protection insurance (PPI) complaints.

The operations director reported that complaints about PPI had increased in
recent weeks, from about 2,500 to 5-6,000 per week. This had inevitably put
pressure on operational systems (which, until recently, had been achieving
improved results). The impact of the operational pressure was being
addressed, whilst maintaining service standards for complaints about all
other issues, or continuing to improve them. He added that the benefits of
team working were becoming apparent, although the pressure of the
increasing numbers of PPI cases had obscured this to some extent.

I didn't have time to comment on this earlier but I think that there are 2 significant things here.

Firstly it appears that the FSA will be applying for a section 404 order for at least one particular bank which will require them review past sales regardless of whether they have been complained of and to pro-actively offer refunds where mis-selling has occurred. And this will circumvent any adverse ruling that the Judicial Review would have on the root cause analysis element of the BBA's claim.

As far as I'm aware, orders granted under s404 cannot be challenged by way of Judicial Review or any other mechanism as they are issued directly by HM Treasury.

Secondly is the sudden explosion in PPI complaints (from 2000 to 5-6000 a week). This is a truly staggering figure and equates to roughly a quarter of a million per year and 137 per office hour, with no lunch break.

[cappo]

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

I didn't have time to comment on this earlier but I think that there are 2 significant things here.

Firstly it appears that the FSA will be applying for a section 404 order for at least one particular bank which will require them review past sales regardless of whether they have been complained of and to pro-actively offer refunds where mis-selling has occurred. And this will circumvent any adverse ruling that the Judicial Review would have on the root cause analysis element of the BBA's claim.

As far as I'm aware, orders granted under s404 cannot be challenged by way of Judicial Review or any other mechanism as they are issued directly by HM Treasury.

Secondly is the sudden explosion in PPI complaints (from 2000 to 5-6000 a week). This is a truly staggering figure and equates to roughly a quarter of a million per year and 137 per office hour, with no lunch break.

i think i,d need a lunch break having to look at that lot EXC and lots of headache pills lol

[di30]

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

This was posted a little time ago by "Which", where they state an outcome could be anytime around the Easter period, we shall soon see.


http://www.which.co.uk/campaigns/per...dicial-review/

When will the outcome of the court case be announced?

The BBA will start to present their case against the FSA on Tuesday 25 January, and the court case is expected to last four days. There is no time limit for the Judge to publish his judgment and his decision could be announced at any time. We hope his judgment will be available during February, or by Easter at the latest.

[cappo]

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

i like the sound of this section 404 how will the banks get around that one, they,ll then have to review old cases which is surely what the j.r is really about(amongst other things) whether they like it or not, anyway i assume this "couid" be used on any bank? nice one EXC for flagging that one up

[Angry Cat]

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

The deputy decisions & legal director provided an update about the Judicial
Review hearing that had taken place between 25 and 28 January. She added
that judgment was expected within the next four to six weeks.

Well, tomorrow is 29th March 2011!

[EXC]

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

Just a bit more on s404(7):

''The use of s404F(7) is subject to different triggers from the ‘industry-wide’ s404, namely the triggers that attach to the imposition of a VVOP (voluntary variation of permission under s.44 of FSMA) or OIVOP (own initiated variation of permission under s.45 of FSMA), and the FSA is not obliged to consult before its use because it affects a single firm rather than the whole industry or sector of the industry.


The FSA has used this power for the first time in February 2011 and recognises that it is desirable to clarify, for firms and consumers, how it intends to use s404F(7). Therefore, it is appropriate for the FSA to consult on and publish guidance on its policy for the use of s404F(7). This is expected to happen in the summer of 2011, when the FSA reviews its guidance on the use of s404.

In advance of this publication, the FSA can and will use its powers under s404F(7), where appropriate, in respect of individual firms where there is potential for mass claims from consumers on a single issue.''

Use of s404f(7) power on single firms

[Class Act]

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

I didn't have time to comment on this earlier but I think that there are 2 significant things here.

Firstly it appears that the FSA will be applying for a section 404 order for at least one particular bank which will require them review past sales regardless of whether they have been complained of and to pro-actively offer refunds where mis-selling has occurred. And this will circumvent any adverse ruling that the Judicial Review would have on the root cause analysis element of the BBA's claim.

As far as I'm aware, orders granted under s404 cannot be challenged by way of Judicial Review or any other mechanism as they are issued directly by HM Treasury.

Secondly is the sudden explosion in PPI complaints (from 2000 to 5-6000 a week). This is a truly staggering figure and equates to roughly a quarter of a million per year and 137 per office hour, with no lunch break.

This may be relevant also;

7.10 Finally, consumer redress schemes cannot be used to require redress in relation to those failures in respect of which a consumer would not have a

right of action in court. A consumer redress scheme could not, therefore, be used to require redress for:

1. breaches of the FSA’s Principles for Business (the FSA’s rules currently provide that breaches of the Principles do not give rise to a right of action in court under s. 150 of FSMA – a change to this would be subject to the FSMA consultation requirements in the usual way);
2. breaches of any other FSA rules where the right of action under s. 150 of FSMA has been switched off in the rules (e.g. the rules in the SYSC module of the FSA Handbook);
3. departure from FSA guidance; or
4. non-compliance with any non-binding code of practice (e.g. industry guidance confirmed by the FSA).

[Angry Cat]

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

Okay, looks like a long wait then...

[EXC]

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

Okay, looks like a long wait then...

Why?

[cappo]

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

Just a bit more on s404(7):

''The use of s404F(7) is subject to different triggers from the ‘industry-wide’ s404, namely the triggers that attach to the imposition of a VVOP (voluntary variation of permission under s.44 of FSMA) or OIVOP (own initiated variation of permission under s.45 of FSMA), and the FSA is not obliged to consult before its use because it affects a single firm rather than the whole industry or sector of the industry.


The FSA has used this power for the first time in February 2011 and recognises that it is desirable to clarify, for firms and consumers, how it intends to use s404F(7). Therefore, it is appropriate for the FSA to consult on and publish guidance on its policy for the use of s404F(7). This is expected to happen in the summer of 2011, when the FSA reviews its guidance on the use of s404.

In advance of this publication, the FSA can and will use its powers under s404F(7), where appropriate, in respect of individual firms where there is potential for mass claims from consumers on a single issue.''

Use of s404f(7) power on single firms

the banks must have been dreading this but then they have rather backed the fsa into a corner haven,t they and you know what they say about wounded animals also we must,nt forget the fos are in with the fsa (i know none of you have) it,s one way to get the banks to comply, our ang must be shaking in her designer boots

[EXC]

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

The FSA have published a 'Consumer complaints (emerging risks and mass claims): Feedback on DP10/1' paper with the FOS and a Memorandum of Understanding between the FSA and the Claims Management Regulator.

FS11/2: Consumer complaints (emerging risks and mass claims): Feedback on DP10/1