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

[Paul210]

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

Has anyone been informed by Lloyds of the following which a colleague of mine was told today by a Lloyds advisor :

Lloyds confirmed today that they have suspended all PPI refund payments as of 29/9. This means that there is no current timescale for when clients will receive their refund.

I'm hoping he has been mis-informed but wanted to see if anyone else had heard of this.

Not heard this per se, however have noticed a significant shift in lloyds staff over the last week or so from occasionally bareley helpfull (previously) to unhelpfull bordering on obstinate (now). Have been told a number of times this week that they cannot tell who may have been paid so far or give an idea of how long the payments backlog is, they refuse to be drawn to even give an off the record 'guestimate' of time to pay from offer going out. When you've got clients ringing asking where their money is the word infuriating isnt enough to describe lloyds current stance.

[Bill-K]

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

I can't answer your most recent question, SKV, but I'm hoping it's just the usual 'Chinese Whisper' that gets passed along. We'll know soon enough, I guess.

If i go to the garage next door to my office and buy a Mars bar for £1.50 when i can get it for 50p elsewhere i can yell at the garage for being jerks but its my own fault for not shopping around for a mars bar right?

Yeah, sure, everybody knows what is a fair price for a Mars bar, but this was a product which does not have a fixed price, and the buyer was acting in good faith, yet was misled by the seller into believing that the price was fair - which it clearly wasn't. However, as EXC says...

The problem is that the courts aren't there to consider what is fair and reasonable in terms of value but rather in terms of what is legal.

In my view the most important message from the judgment is don't take a PPI dispute to court.

Such is the @$$ that our Law has to be - narrow-visioned and stubborn. We have the luxury of being able to argue over the 'Big Picture,' whereas the Judiciary are obliged to wear blinkers - or a blinfold and a set of scales. I guess I would prefer the status quo, really. The emotive stuff is the domain of our similarly blesséd media - another argument - another day, eh ? !!!

[skv123]

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

Has anyone been informed by Lloyds of the following which a colleague of mine was told today by a Lloyds advisor :

Lloyds confirmed today that they have suspended all PPI refund payments as of 29/9. This means that there is no current timescale for when clients will receive their refund.

I'm hoping he has been mis-informed but wanted to see if anyone else had heard of this.

[JDEH]

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

The problem is that the courts aren't there to consider what is fair and reasonable in terms of value but rather in terms of what is legal.

In my view the most important message from the judgment is don't take a PPI dispute to court.

I agree with this. In fact, try to avoid the court in all CCAct matters, as you never know what the court will decide (particularly if the consumer's friend Waxsman J is involved).
However, don't be too downhearted by this decision, it is very narrow one looking at unfairness under s104 CCA arising from commission earned by the intermediaries. I don't think it materially effects the main reasons why PPI mis-selling has taken place and the borrowers rights to redress arising from them.

[skv123]

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

If i go to the garage next door to my office and buy a Mars bar for £1.50 when i can get it for 50p elsewhere i can yell at the garage for being jerks but its my own fault for not shopping around for a mars bar right?

[EXC]

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

The problem is that the courts aren't there to consider what is fair and reasonable in terms of value but rather in terms of what is legal.

In my view the most important message from the judgment is don't take a PPI dispute to court.

[Bill-K]

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

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1128.html

They lost the appeal.

M1

For the Court of Appeal to consider that an undisclosed 'commission' of £8,800 on the sale of an insurance policy valued at £1,700 is fair and reasonable is a travesty, IMHO. If this is our globally blesséd 'Law,' then it is not only asinine by nature - it is criminally insane !!!

[mystery1]

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

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/1128.html

They lost the appeal.

M1

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

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

Court hearing lists

Court of Appeal Civil Division

[wannabedebtfreesoon]

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

The appeal in the case of Harrison v Black Horse has been heard in the Court of Appeal and is awaiting judgment. Interestingly the Harrisons were represented by Brian Doctor QC who acted for the OFT in the first instance bank charges test case hearing.





Couple go to appeal court in battle over £10,500 'protection'


A COUPLE are fighting a groundbreaking Appeal Court battle claiming they were mis-sold payment protection insurance by a lender.

Elaine and Andrew Harrison's case is the first of its kind to go before the court.

The Ravenshead couple borrowed £60,000 from Black Horse Ltd in July 2006.

When they signed the deal they also agreed to a payment protection insurance policy from Lloyds TSB General Insurance Ltd.

The policy was sold to them by Black Horse, which, acting as an agent for its related insurance firm, recommended the optional cover.

When they paid off the loan in March 2009, they had paid more than £10,500 for the cover, which protected their loan repayments if they were unable to meet them due to illness.

Out of that sum, Black Horse were paid commission of more than £8,800 - about 87 per cent of the cost of the PPI - which was something they hadn't told Mr and Mrs Harrison about when they took out the insurance, judges heard. The couple went to Worcester County Court and then Manchester Mercantile Court in a bid for damages, claiming they were mis-sold the policy.

The court heard from an expert that the policy was expensive, and that similar cover could have been obtained elsewhere for about £2,000.

But their claim was rejected, first by a district judge and then by Judge Waksman QC in November last year.

Mr and Mrs Harrison have now taken their fight to the Court of Appeal where they are arguing that the failure of Black Horse to disclose the high level of commission the firm would receive for selling the PPI resulted in an "unfair relationship" between lender and borrower.

Their lawyers argued that, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, they were entitled to money back.

Brian Doctor, QC, acting for the couple, said: "The claimants did not have an informed choice, and did not have their eyes open, owing to the non-disclosure of the commission."

Nicholas Elliott, QC, for Black Horse, urged the judges to uphold the previous decisions, saying the Harrisons were told the PPI was optional and could be cancelled and they were under no obligation to buy it.

The Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, Lord Justice Patten and Lord Justice Tomlinson reserved judgment on the case until an unspecified date.


Couple go to appeal court in battle over Pounds 10,500 | Nottingham Evening Post | Find Articles at BNET

I believe today's the day!

[Leucareth1971]

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

Hi I spoke to the FOS who sent a letter to RBS and I have just had a call from RBS saying that the chqs have been sent out today recorded delivery:tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[leclerc]

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

I have been waiting 51 WORKING days (27th July) RBS claim that they sent them out so they put a stop on the chqs and said I would get the new ones within 10 days that was the 19th Sept still waiting:tinysmile_aha_t:

Chase it up then, cos that's what I am doing with regards to my mum's LloydTSB claim.......

[Leucareth1971]

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

WORKING DAYS or normal days?

I have been waiting 51 WORKING days (27th July) RBS claim that they sent them out so they put a stop on the chqs and said I would get the new ones within 10 days that was the 19th Sept still waiting:tinysmile_aha_t:

[Bill-K]

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

...Every Little Helps.....cough,cough....

[EXC]

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

I see Tesco bank have announced a £92m provision for PPI redress in their accounts and have so far paid out £16m.