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

[di30]

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

Obviously an automatically generated response!

Yes it looks like it and very little of it too. I just asked how long should others be waiting basically, even though mine had been with them before xmas (resolved), some were probably before and even after.

[Fortinbras]

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

From reading this they agreed not to take further action, not that the debt is extinguished, as such if push comes to shove they can still exercise their right of offset.

I don't think right of offset applies here. This is from the FOS website:

Certain conditions must be met before the firm can exercise its right of "set off".

• the account from which the firm transfers funds must be held by the customer who owes the firm money.
• the account from which the firm transfers the money – and the account from which the money would otherwise have come – must both be held with the same firm.
• the account from which the firm transfers funds – and the account from which the money would otherwise have come – must both be held in the same capacity by the customer concerned. So, for example, if Mrs C holds a savings account in her capacity as treasurer of a local society, the firm cannot take money from that account to pay Mrs C’s personal credit card bill that she normally pays from the current account she holds in a personal capacity.
• the debt must be due and payable. For example, if a customer misses making a loan payment, then (at least until it calls in the loan) the firm can take only the missed payment – not the balance of the loan.

banking: firms' right of

[Angry Cat]

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

What? - you think I should apply to Cabot for the refund?

They did buy the debt, rights and duties etc...haha - can you imagine? LOL

Does beg the question though doesn't it? who should pay?

Now one final question, I paid this loan, taken out in Apr 2001 for about 18 months before I got into trouble including the PPI payment and they sold it on to Cabot in 2006. After that I paid the odd bit here and there whenever I got chased by one dca or another up until 2006. The insurance actually paid out for 1 yr from Apr 2004 until March 2005 which is all they'd pay for under the policy despite me being ill for much longer than that (3 yrs) when my business died.

The balance when sold was £18k

That's as far as it got.

Now do I ask them for the full £6000 less the monies they paid out on the policy for that 1 yr (£404 a month x 12 = £4850) plus interest or what?

Would it be deemed that the full 6k had been paid or not given the fact I had not paid that much? - Would I be unjustly enriched in that case?

Yes, it does pose the question:
Who should pay, in the case of a purported absolute assignment?

Did you continue to pay the PPI premiums after your initial claim was accepted?

Why couldn't you claim again, as with car insurance for example?
Presumably, the exclusion and limitation clauses prevented you from doing so:
you couldn't return to work as your illness had become long term and;
even if you could have returned to work, your second claim would not have been successful, due to preexisting condition(s).

How much remained owing, after your initial claim came to an end?

Most policies should clear the outstanding balance, at the time of the claim.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
The problem with these sort of policies is that the ppi payments are made monthly over 12 months, but the interest keeps accruing...

[andrew1]

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

Yes, it does pose the question:
Who should pay, in the case of a purported absolute assignment?

Did you continue to pay the PPI premiums after your initial claim was accepted?

Why couldn't you claim again, as with car insurance for example?
Presumably, the exclusion and limitation clauses prevented you from doing so:
you couldn't return to work as your illness had become long term and;
even if you could have returned to work, your second claim would not have been successful, due to preexisting condition(s).

How much remained owing, after your initial claim came to an end?

Most policies should clear the outstanding balance, at the time of the claim.
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
The problem with these sort of policies is that the ppi payments are made monthly over 12 months, but the interest keeps accruing...

well I've just sent off a reply: Slightly shortened here saying:


This account was indeed sold by Bank to DCA. However, DCA have given up their rights to this account as stated in the attached documents therefore, any refunds made on this PPI are effectively my own and not the Debt Purchasing Company’s.

If I Keep it simple for now and see what they say rather than try and be technical and dig myself a hole, then I can pick up from there, but this whole PPI question of selling/assigning the whole debt and who pays is an interesting one. Thank you folks for giving me your opinions. I'll come back when they reply.

A1

[EXC]

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

From today's Times:


Victims of PPI mis-selling now harassed by cold callers

Advisers are selling on clients' private details for profit says David Budworth

Greedy financial advisers are using the payment protection insurance (PPI) mis-selling scandal to line their pockets by selling on information about their customers to claims management companies.

Claims managers, and companies that work for them, are paying thousands of pounds for data about potential customers who are then targeted by phone with promises to help win compensation. The typical referral fee is about £750 per person, which means that advisers can earn tens of thousands of pounds in “backhanders” for very little effort.

The payments resemble the kickbacks paid by lawyers and claims handlers to insurance companies for details of customers involved in accidents, which some organisations want to ban.

Controversy also surrounds the use of claims handlers, because they take a 25 per cent cut as standard from compensation payouts, when it is possible for borrowers who were mis-sold PPI to complain for free. Fierce competition for a slice of an estimated £9 billion compensation bill has intensified since the banks dropped a legal challenge blocking refunds last month.

However, the money being paid for “leads” and referrals means that it is not just claims managers who are exploiting the scandal for profit. A Times Money investigation has found that:

• Financial advisers and loan brokers who “introduce” potential clients to claims companies can command fees of up to £900 per individual. Handing over a database of 100 clients could result in a £90,000 payday.

• The sale of leads means that some claims managers know a surprising amount about the credit cards, mortgages and loans of people who they cold call. PPI was typically sold alongside these financial products, so these customers are more likely to be persuaded to make a mis-selling claim.

• Consumers who are persuaded by their adviser to use a claims company are unlikely to realise that the adviser is being paid for their details.

• Some loan brokers are connected with claims management companies, though the link is not made clear to customers. We Fight Any Claim, advertised by boxer Joe Calzaghe, is part of the same group as Yes Loans, for example. They are both controlled by members of the same family and have the same registered address. In November, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) took action against the company after it emerged that people phoning Yes Loans were being automatically transferred to We Fight Any Claim.

• Individual advisers who mis-sold PPI could be profiting a second time from their bad advice by selling on customer databases to claims handlers for a fee.

Selling leads is lawful and there are legitimate companies, known as lead introduction agencies that do nothing else. Advertisements offering payments for customer leads that “could generate extremely lucrative income” and a “massive opportunity to earn thousands of pounds” can be freely found on the internet. These ads show that companies are also in the market for customers with debt management problems and those who may be able to claim a refund on credit card charges or for a mis-sold mortgage.
There is no suggestion that these companies are doing anything wrong. However, it is believed that many deals are being done clandestinely by rogue operators to avoid detection. If information is passed on without customers’ consent it is a breach of the Data Protection Act.

Peter Tutton, the credit and debt policy officer at Citizens Advice, says: “All this stuff is going on below the watchline. Evidence strongly suggests that extensive sharing of information is taking place, often without customers’ knowledge or permission. Individuals go to a loan broker and are then contacted by lots of other loan brokers, and debt and claims management companies. Financial advisers and credit brokers are also passing information on.”

People who believe that their data has been sold in breach of the data protection rules are being urged to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which has the power to fine an offending business up to £500,000 (ico.gov.uk or 03031 231113). The ICO says: “The first thing to do if you are receiving unwanted phone calls is to tell the caller to stop. If you have concerns following that, come to us.”

However, Citizens Advice is concerned that many rogue operators are getting away scot-free because the safeguards for consumers are too confusing. A company cannot be fined for breaching the Data Protection Act if the customer has given consent for their data to be shared. Mr Tutton fears that many people give this consent without their knowledge.

“Simply by clicking through a website you may be deemed to have given your permission for a company to pass on data to third parties. This emphasises the need to always read the small print,” he says. If you have inadvertently given permission to be contacted, you can give an organisation written notice to stop using your data and it must comply. Signing up to the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) also offers some protection (tpsonline.org.uk or 0845 0700707).

The MoJ says: “A business should not process someone’s personal data, which includes passing their details on to another business or using a lead to cold call a person, if that person has opted out or is registered with the TPS.” There is also a Mailing Preference Service (mpsonline.org.uk, 0845 7034599).

However, some companies have found ways around the rules, enabling them to continue to harass consumers after they have asked that they stop.

Mr Tutton says: “Tucked away at the back of the smallprint of some companies are statements which say that by agreeing to the terms and conditions, consumers agree to their contact details being passed on to other companies and that this overrides any previous preference service registrations. In our view this is dodgy.” But it isn’t against the rules.

Another level of protection is provided by the conduct rules of the Claims Management Regulator. These state that if a business sells information used to identify whether an individual has a claim, it needs to be authorised by the MoJ. You can see which companies are authorised at claimsregulation.gov.uk.

Paying advisers for leads is just one way that information about potential clients for claim managers is sourced, and unfortunately the other tactics used are often a source of annoyance and harassment. Call centres in the UK and overseas have been deluging consumers with cold calls and automated messages in an effort to build up databases that they can sell on to claims managers. Some claims handlers have been calling random numbers and sending unsolicited text messages in an attempt to reel in the personal details of potential customers. These texts usually say: “Our records indicate you may be entitled to thousands of pounds from mis-sold loan insurance. To claim, reply YES to this message.”

Few people who are the target of these calls and texts are happy to receive them. The Information Commissioner received more than 6,000 complaints about cold calling, text messages and automated messages last year, making them the second biggest source of complaints. Cold calls are permitted provided they are made in compliance with the Direct Marketing Association’s (DMA) voluntary code of practice. This means that anyone who has signed up to the TPS should be shielded from most marketing calls.
The ICO advises not to respond to phishing texts.

Claims handlers that breach the DMA code or the Data Protection Act can have their authorisation to operate suspended or cancelled. Consumers can report any concerns by e-mailing consumer@claimsregulation.gov.uk or by phoning 0845 4506858.
Even claim management companies believe that regulations need to be tighter.

Sally Bowyer, managing director of Brunel Franklin, says: “The MoJ is doing a reasonable job at working through complaints about rogue companies and acting where appropriate, but as with any industry members of the public need to be on their guard for the rogue operator. We would urge stronger action in certain cases, based on recent allegations. Some companies are giving the industry a bad name and it’s not in anyone’s interests for this to go unchecked.”

‘It should be an opt-in rather than opt-out service’
Isla Whitcroft, from Towcester, Northamptonshire, has been plagued by phone calls from claims handlers over the past month. They have ignored her repeated demands that they stop.

The health journalist, whose first novel The Cate Carlisle Files: Trapped is out later this month, works from home and receives two to three calls a day.

Her husband, who has a separate phone line, has been getting a similar number of calls.

The calls claim that Isla, 47, has a payment protection insurance (PPI) plan that was mis-sold and that she is entitled to compensation.

As far as she is aware she does not have a PPI policy, nor has ever had one. When she points this out to the caller, he usually accepts what she says and rings off, but the calls continue.

Isla says: “I work from home so I can’t ignore the phone, but over the past four weeks I have been deluged with cold calls about payment protection insurance. Some of the calls are automated, others have human beings at the end.

“When I ask where they got my number from, they usually say ‘a database’. I’ve asked to be taken off the list and they usually agree, but four hours later the phone goes again.”

Isla has no idea where the database has come from, but has her suspicions. She says: “Whenever you buy anything on the internet, you end up on a marketing system. It seems to be a standard way for online retailers to make extra money.
“All these sites say that they will take your details and use them unless you opt out.

“There should be an opt-in service, but that is never going to happen as nobody would do it.”

As the calls won’t stop, Isla has accepted them as an annoying part of her daily life. But she is concerned that others might be vulnerable to the hard sell and could be persuaded to hand over money, especially if they are pensioners.


Avoid claims handlers
Consumer groups have urged victims of payment protection insurance (PPI) mis-selling to steer clear of claims handlers, which take a cut of compensation payments.

Claims handlers, whose advertisements fill daytime television, promise quick, hassle-free refunds on a no-win, no-fee basis. However, they can pocket up to 40 per cent of any refunds and some also demand an upfront fee of several hundred pounds for work that a customer could do for nothing.

Peter Vicary-Smith, chief executive of Which?, the consumer organisation, says: “By going to a claims management company you’ll pay what could be a lot of money for something you can easily do yourself.”

Claims handlers say that many people struggle to win refunds alone, and that dealing with banks and insurers can be daunting.

However, Martin Lewis, of the financial website Moneysaving expert.com, says that the only people who should consider claims companies are those whose policies were bought before 2005 from non-FSA regulated companies, the financially illiterate or those with mental health problems.

Everyone else should first make a clear, written complaint directly to the bank or company that sold the PPI. It then has eight weeks to investigate the claim.

If the claim is rejected or if the case goes beyond the eight-week deadline it can be taken to the Financial Ombudsman (Financial Ombudsman Service).

[oorbrian]

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

Wish i had a time machine EXC and read that BEFORE i signed away my percentage

[charitynjw]

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

Anyone reading this thread who is unsure how to reclaim PPI, I would be happy to offer my services for the usual fee (+ expenses).
All payments to be made in used fivers, in a brown envelope, & sent to the usual address (behind the cistern of the public loo in my town's car park).
Thank you for your valued custom.

[leclerc]

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

Anyone reading this thread who is unsure how to reclaim PPI, I would be happy to offer my services for the usual fee (+ expenses).
All payments to be made in used fivers, in a brown envelope, & sent to the usual address (behind the cistern of the public loo in my town's car park).
Thank you for your valued custom.

I can only get new £5 notes from the ATM.....how disappointing, lol!!!

[charitynjw]

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

I can only get new £5 notes from the ATM.....how disappointing, lol!!!

They'll do (at a pinch!) lol

[leclerc]

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

will you take a post dated cheque for the 1st July?

[charitynjw]

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

LC, I know you, & of course trust you to behave like a gentleman!
Unfortunately, the car park rules forbid kite flying,
My hands are tied on this one.

[leclerc]

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

GRRR!!! my cheque idea was so good since the Guarantee scheme runs out at the end of the month.......I wish you would take my cue's lol!!!!

Am off to get the scissors to cut the string off your kite

[EXC]

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

From today's Daily Express



BANK PAY-OUTS FOR MILLIONS

Barclays is to become the first bank to pay out in full

Monday June 13,2011

By Andrew Johnson

BANK customers wrongly sold payment protection insurance are in line for fast-track compensation worth millions.

The Daily Express has learned that Barclays is to become the first bank to pay out in full on a “no questions asked” basis.

Letters to customers mis-sold insurance will start going out today and some could receive cheques by the end of August. The average compensation per victim, industry wide, has been estimated at about £2,800.

Banks have set aside billions to cover the claims, believed to affect more than three million customers, in a bid to restore their battered reputation.

Today’s move will pile pressure on rivals such as taxpayer-backed Lloyds Banking Group and the Royal Bank of Scotland, as well as HSBC, to follow suit. Barclays has tens of thousands of customers whose complaints were unresolved when the industry launched a High Court action last year – to challenge stricter rules from the City watchdog, the Financial Services Authority, on selling PPI.

Banks have set aside billions to cover the claims

Barclays’ move is being driven by retail banking chief Antony Jenkins and last night the consumer rights group Which? welcomed the decision.

“Banks have a lot to do to rebuild their reputation over a decade of mis-selling PPI and then mishandling complaints about it,” said chief executive Peter Vicary-Smith.

“It’s fantastic to see Barclays stepping up in this way, acknowledging their mistakes and refunding customers what they’re owed, no questions asked.

“Hopefully, this will have a domino effect and other banks will follow suit. The sooner the banking industry can consign the PPI mis-selling scandal to the history books, the better.”

Barclays’ payments to the customers affected are estimated at about £100million, but it has set aside £1billion in total to try to resolve the problem once and for all.

Customers will also receive interest of eight per cent on the sums they are owed in recognition of the delay caused by the High Court challenge.

By the end of August everyone agreeing to be compensated will know how much they are going to get.

[debtisbad]

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

From today's Daily Express



BANK PAY-OUTS FOR MILLIONS

Barclays is to become the first bank to pay out in full

Monday June 13,2011

By Andrew Johnson

BANK customers wrongly sold payment protection insurance are in line for fast-track compensation worth millions.

The Daily Express has learned that Barclays is to become the first bank to pay out in full on a “no questions asked” basis.

Letters to customers mis-sold insurance will start going out today and some could receive cheques by the end of August. The average compensation per victim, industry wide, has been estimated at about £2,800.
By the end of August everyone agreeing to be compensated will know how much they are going to get.

Well, this is certainly a step in the right direction, I hope that all the others follow suit. However, in my own case, I had two cases where there were no records kept. One has paid out the other claim I only recently started. Obviously, banks cannot write to people if they have no original records. So this may also be a sneaky trick to appear all cooperative, etc, whilst not having to pay out as much as everyone thinks.

[leclerc]

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

BBC News - Barclays to settle payment protection insurance claims
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
The key date is April 20th which is where they will settle all claims. Any claims after that date they will judge on the merit of each case so that does not mean that if you put a claim in today that it will be settled automatically.