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

[NLP]

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

Ha ha - I see Mr Angry is living up to his name.

Take it easy on him the reasoned types posting on here.... always remember anger is born out of a bad world one finds themselves inside.

Hopefully all turns out well for him in the end.

[cappo]

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

just a question guys,forgive my ignorance but just how far are banks going to have to go back time wise on these complaints,(where they have to contact customers) sorry if i,ve missed the answer on the posts here i,ve not been on here much in the last few days.

[SoapyBubbles]

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

Sadly, they are the same as the OFT were over the bank charges and still are today on other issues, such as one company I know trading with an unlicenced trading style they (the OFT) were told about over 3 yrs ago and this company continue to repossess homes at a grand rate of knots right under their noses. As you say, a distinct lack of the bobbly things between the legs this lot !

So basically the FSA are incompetent, incapable and irrelevant?

[di30]

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

http://dialog.newsedge.com/portal.as...&block=default


Industry News05/01/2011 07:07:57 AM EDT -- Mail on Sunday (England)
Will banks fight High Court over mis-sold PPI ruling?

BANKS are holding crunch meetings with their lawyers this week to decide whether to carry on their fight to overturn hundreds of thousands of complaints about mis-sold payment protection insurance.

The British Bankers' Association has just nine days to ask for permission to appeal after the High Court last month rejected its claim that new rules for handling complaints about the mis-selling of PPI were unlawful. Many complaints are now on hold pending the banks' move.

Members of the BBA, including Barclays, Lloyds TSB and HSBC, have to decide on any appeal by a week Tuesday. They are under renewed pressure from the Financial Ombudsman Service not to delay matters any longer. The FOS has taken on more than 100,000 PPI complaints in the past year alone.
Chief Ombudsman Natalie Ceeney says fighting on will damage the banks' reputations further.

'The approach taken by the businesses involved in this legal action has meant we have not been able to resolve as many cases as we would have hoped,' she says. 'This has led to delays, uncertainty and frustration for consumers. Now we have a clear-cut ruling, we need to work together to resolve these complaints as quickly as possible. It will greatly benefit all of our reputations to do so.' The BBA would not be comment on the issue.
Stephen Womack

[leclerc]

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

AC, with regards to tracing customers and I'm happy for anyone to open this topic up, the question for me was simply to everyone advocating that route is as to when that begins?

It's a bit like the right to vote, we all have the right to vote(with the exception of some of are inelegible to do so) but not everyone exercises that right. So drawing a parallel with the PPI cases, you might have the right to claim but when does the bank have to trace customers if they do not respond to the mailing? Should there be a quota for returning any correspondence?
People are not answering that part of the question if I take the issue as being a given(which I don't).

[EXC]

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

e.g:
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/...2008/115.shtml

The A&L customer contact exercise isn't an example of the DISP PPI RCA appendix quoted (which deals exculsively with PPI and is the bone of contention in the JR) which only came into effect in December as a result of the 10/12 Policy Statement, before the A&L scenario.

The distinction between the two is that the new DISP PPI handbook appendix targets the sales practices to non-complainants exclusively, where the A&L exercise included reviewing past rejected complaints.

[Angry Cat]

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

It's does not appear on the mail online edition, AC.

With regards to tracing people, not one person has yet to say when this tracing is to occur?
What rules are to be applied?
How long they should use their time to trace people?

Can anyone enlighten me as to when the above rules will take place?


For AC, we haven't met so I hope you're not hitting on me but being male, I am crap at reading the signals.
Furthermore, I have never spoke for the banking industry either officially or unofficially. I've helped on forums with experience within banking and with dealing with financial institutions post sacking. I guess you've had x number of years on PPI stuff, and I have spent 5 years more or less on internet based forums.

Really BORED with all this, leclerc!

However, I think that we are all attempting to fire the same bullet...

by Mail on Sunday: stephen womack

BANKS are holding crunch meetings with their lawyers this week to decide whether to carry on their fight to overturn hundreds of thousands of complaints about mis-sold payment protection insurance....

Natalie Ceeney commented re: the Banks':
fighting on will damage the banks' reputation further...

"The approach taken by the businesses involved in this legal action has meant we have not been able to resolve as many cases as we would have hoped"
she says
"This has led to delays uncertainty and frustration for consumers. Now we have a clear-cut ruling, we need to work together to resolve these complaints as quickly as possible.
It will greatly benefit all our reputations to do so."

The BBA would not comment on the issue.

[Angry Cat]

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

e.g:
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/...2008/115.shtml

by the FSA:
A&L has agreed to implement a substantial and comprehensive customer contact programme, overseen by third party accountants. It will write to all customers who took out policies by telephone in conjunction with an unsecured loan between 14 January 2005 and 31 December 2007 prompting them to review their policy against product information sent to them. It will also review any relevant rejected complaints and claims and has committed to pay redress where appropriate.

[EXC]

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

In respect of 'tracing' I think that it's important to bear in mind that Root Cause Analysis is not an exercise in pro-actively reviewing individual complaints, identifying individual cases of mis-selling and then contacting the customer to offer a refund.

Rather, according to the FSA's DISP PPI RCA appendix, it is a case of identifying ''tranches'' of complaints where sales to non-complainants ''may have suffered detriment...... or potentially disadvantaged......[and] if so, take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure that those customers are given appropriate redress or a proper opportunity to obtain it.''

So it's not a case of ''we owe you some money'' but ''we might owe you some money''. And according to one law firm the communication would ''invite them to submit a complaint''.

http://hb.betterregulation.com/exter...20Judgment.pdf

AFAIA not even Her Majesty's Customs & Revenue are required to hire tracing companies in the event that they've charged people too much tax, let alone might have. Therefore I think it is unrealistic to expect the FSA to require banks to be obliged to hire tracing companies for a fishing exercise. But I do think that in cases where the bank realises that a non-complainant has been mis-sold to, the bank's obligations should extend beyond mailing the letter where no response has been forthcoming.

[leclerc]

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

It's does not appear on the mail online edition, AC.

With regards to tracing people, not one person has yet to say when this tracing is to occur?
What rules are to be applied?
How long they should use their time to trace people?

Can anyone enlighten me as to when the above rules will take place?


For AC, we haven't met so I hope you're not hitting on me but being male, I am crap at reading the signals.
Furthermore, I have never spoke for the banking industry either officially or unofficially. I've helped on forums with experience within banking and with dealing with financial institutions post sacking. I guess you've had x number of years on PPI stuff, and I have spent 5 years more or less on internet based forums.

[Angry Cat]

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

Is there a link to this article as a search on mail on sunday did not find it thanks

Page 84 Personal Finance Section, PF:beagle:

The article doesn't say much more than we already really knew. However, if you are unable to find it, I will gladly type it out freehand.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Let's waste their time tracing dead people, people who have moved away from the country and people who have never had an issue with PPI. Unreasonable and highly unlikely to happen in a billion trillion years so let's move ourselves back onto terra firma and find out what is likely to happen?
Will there be pro active refunds?
Unlikely where the account is closed.
Will they be forced to trace people and when should that trace begin?
When mail is returned from the address? When they don't claim misselling? When the bank might think without much evidence that perhaps in hindsight it might not have been right to sell it to them?

As I said, we have a current live case which is Welcome Finance so we'll see what actually happens in the process, won't we?

Not much point, even attempting to respond the the above!

[pompeyfaith]

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

Is there a link to this article as a search on mail on sunday did not find it thanks

[leclerc]

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

Sorry,

as I've said several times LC, I have a lot of time for your comments on many areas and am impressed with your knowledge in many areas, but in this particular point I must disagree -

If you agreed with me 100% of the time I would start to wonder whether you were stalking me
It's straight and simple, it is perfectly reasonable to expect them to go to the same effort to trace a past customer and return monies (being generous in the extreme!) "mistakenly" taken from them for a missold insurance policy as they would when the customer owes them money but has left the adress the bank has recorded
As I have already stated above, they will only have to write to the customer at the address on file. Some people may have moved and not claimed and mail might not be returned. Another question; Should the bank expect a 100% response to any letter sent out should they have to do that? If Mail is Returned from the address please explain WHY they have to verify if the former customer is alive or dead? For what conceivable reason should they trace the person when they might be dead so electoral roll is out since AFAIK no dead person is allowed to vote(albeit some candidates might appear a bit dead ).
As someone else pointed out, this trace work will cost the banks, but that is quite frankly tough - I wouldn't mind betting that come the end of it all the banks would still come out on top financially as no doubt a lot of this loss would be written off against tax

I think a trace is not something that the FOS/FSA will insist on. A letter being sent out they will probably go to but tracing people who do not respond/have mail returned is highly unlikely and I would doubt that the FOS/FSA would assume is a reasonable step to do.
ETA: The number of customers that would need to be gtraced should bear no relevance to this at all, they were quite happy taking the money from millions of people, so now let them find them and pay them back their ill gotten gains

Let's waste their time tracing dead people, people who have moved away from the country and people who have never had an issue with PPI. Unreasonable and highly unlikely to happen in a billion trillion years so let's move ourselves back onto terra firma and find out what is likely to happen?
Will there be pro active refunds?
Unlikely where the account is closed.
Will they be forced to trace people and when should that trace begin?
When mail is returned from the address? When they don't claim misselling? When the bank might think without much evidence that perhaps in hindsight it might not have been right to sell it to them?

As I said, we have a current live case which is Welcome Finance so we'll see what actually happens in the process, won't we?

[Angry Cat]

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

Interesting article and Mail On Sunday never go together.....sensationalised story with a hint of fact in it is more the case for their readership

Really?

Leclerc, one wonders if you live in a world of your own; in a bubble?

I believe, that we have had this discussion before re: The Mail. However, I managed to find the same press article in, The Times...

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not hitting on leclerc, just some of his banking industry viewpoints.:beagle:

[leclerc]

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

Moving on,
There was an interesting article in today's Mail on Sunday:

"Will banks fight High Court over mis-sold PPI ruling?

Interesting article and Mail On Sunday never go together.....sensationalised story with a hint of fact in it is more the case for their readership