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

[Bill-K]

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

...a payment of £13.66 PPI premium from May 2002 resulted in £1.30(ish) interest payment, this on a card bearing 16% APR...

Just catching up - I know this one's a bit stale, ncf, but I needed to comment. Without seeing your spready, I suspect that the £1.30(ish) interest payment was the portion of account interest charged in that particular month, which was attributable to the PPI. What you should see in later months is that this should increase, because the amount of PPI contained within the balance owing accumulates over time. The 'apportioned' account interest also becomes a part of this equation, so it does accumulate over time.

This 'apportionment' can eventually reach 100% of the balance owing, and in such cases, ALL account interest is reclaimable, and further compensatory interest may be claimed - usually at the Statutory rate of 8% simple.

...the banks have to consider proactively (HOW wet??!!) contacting customers that have not complained, where they have identified a systematic issue (for instance calls made to sell PPI for a certain credit card between certain dates ?)
............
"(2) consider whether it is fair and reasonable for the firm to undertake
proactively a redress or remediation exercise, which may include
contacting customers who have not complained"

[my emphases in red]
As you imply - and EXC has also observed - the wording is very vague and non-committal, isn't it ? The ONLY obligation there is for the banks to "consider" - which I am sure they will confirm they have done in every argued case. There is no stipulation that such consideration should be given with any due diligence - nor that it should take more than a micro-second of anyone's time. I guess all we really have to fall back on is what is "fair and reasonable" - and that's another discussion, and another delay.

[Angry Cat]

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

by enaid:
It recently emerged that the ombudsman service is so overwhelmed by consumer complaints that many cases are now taking between 18 months and two years to be resolved.

No change then!
Many cases in 2005/6 were taking between 18 months and two years to be resolved...

[enaid]

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

Lloyds tops bank complaints list - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

But it was reported recently that some banks were in danger of missing the 31 August deadline imposed by the FSA for clearing their backlog of PPI mis-selling complaints.

Consumer groups said the ombudsman's figures were strong evidence of the banks' inability to treat PPI complaints fairly.

Oliver Morgans, financial services expert at Consumer Focus, said: "There has been a massive surge in complaints about this issue with some banks showing a totally unacceptable uphold rate. Even the seemingly better performers appear to be unnecessarily stringing out complaints, challenging decisions and denying consumers compensation.

"The banks should be ashamed at their continuing failure to tackle the PPI issue. Following the court case we expect the next set of FOS figures to show PPI complaints are being dealt with properly by banks without consumers needing to contact the ombudsman.
Which? executive director Richard Lloyd agreed:"These numbers show that some banks are still not dealing with PPI complaints fairly. If the next round of complaints data doesn't show a dramatic improvement then the FSA must take tough enforcement action against banks whose complaints handling isn't up to scratch."

A spokesperson from Lloyds said: "Overall we have made progress in the vast majority of complaint categories, reducing both the number of complaints being referred to the FOS and decreasing the number of decisions being overturned.

"However the increase in PPI complaints is consistent across the industry. It is clear we have more work to do and we expect our progress in the first half of 2011 to continue into the second half of the year."

It recently emerged that the ombudsman service is so overwhelmed by consumer complaints that many cases are now taking between 18 months and two years to be resolved.

[EXC]

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

I am assuming the banks will take a very liberal view on this bit ie they'll state that the timescale will be 6 months after the date of them giving up the ghost, so to speak. It's worth asking the question, I guess to the FSA perhaps.

I've sent an FoI.


The implementation of the Root Cause Analysis requirements for firms in the Policy Statement 10/12 was to have commenced in mid Q1 2011, giving firms time to initially prioritise their efforts to the fair handling of PPI complaints.

The monitoring time table of the Root Cause Analysis requirements in the Policy Statement 10/12 was as follows:

Early Q1 2011: we will write to several firms (selected on a risk/impact basis)
asking them for a detailed self-report on what root cause analysis they have done,
the results of this, and what steps they are planning as a result concerning changing
sales practices going forward and/or treating non-complainants fairly.

Q2 - Q4 2011: we will carry out (and/or potentially ask skilled persons to report on)
detailed and intensive reviews of the approach to root cause analysis of several firms
(again selected on a risk/impact basis) and, in particular, their consideration of,
andwhere appropriate the scope and fairness of, their own initiative actions towards
non-complainants, and the effectiveness of these actions in giving relevant non-complainants
redress or proper opportunity to obtain it.

1) Given that the Judicial Review proceedings effectively delayed firms' implementation of the PS 10/12, what is the revised implementation date for the Root Cause Analysis requirements?

2) As priority has been given to the fair handling of complaints, is there a separate, later implementation date for Root Cause Analysis for the firms that were granted an extension to dealing with complaints beyond the standard 8 week period?

3) What is the revised time table for the monitoring of the Root Cause Analysis requirements?

4) To date how many firms’ if any, have either initiated customer contact exercises under the Root Cause Analysis requirements of PS10/12 (as distinct from past business reviews already agreed) or have indicated an intention to do so. Please note I am not asking for any firm specific data.

[dogtired]

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

Got a very small cheque from BOS yesterday, no indication the the "balance" has now closed this account and when I asked just got put through to Blair Oliver Scott who quoted a completely different outstanding amount and that i should now contact Cabot......

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

URGENT HELP REQUIRED

Following my conversation today with the production company they have asked me to find someone who has used a Claims Management Company where they have been asked to pay upfront fees, then have been asked to pay further fees to continue with their claim which has then put them in a vunerable situation pushing them into a hardship situation. Can you please urgently PM me if this has happened to you and you would be prepared to take part.

Read more at: Help Required Urgently With Cmc's - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

[EXC]

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

Also, customers who logged formal complaints about PPI that was sold prior to the FSA regulation of same, must also be contacted and the complaints looked at again.

Root Cause Analysis only applies to non-complainants I'm afraid.

[Angry Cat]

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

In my view, the Banks are laying in the long grass and will be dragging their heels until the middle of 2012.

However, where there has been systematic failings re: their selling of PPI, these banks must proactively contact those customers affected.
Two examples could be Egg and Capital One who both have been fined by the FSA; there are plenty of other examples

Also, customers who logged formal complaints about PPI that was sold prior to the FSA regulation of same, must also be contacted and the complaints looked at again.

[leclerc]

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

OK, so the essence of the debate is whether or not the banks are proactively doing this, or whether they are shying away from it.

Not exactly if they are taking the date of implementation as being either April this year or possibly May this year since root cause analysis

"While firms should also implement by this date the guidance on root cause analysis
and firms’ obligations to consider the position of non-complainants who may have
been affected by recurrent sales problems, we would not expect firms (absent specific
imperatives to the contrary) to commence any own initiative actions they consider required
as a result (e.g. consumer contact exercises) until six months after this PS is published"

I am assuming the banks will take a very liberal view on this bit ie they'll state that the timescale will be 6 months after the date of them giving up the ghost, so to speak. It's worth asking the question, I guess to the FSA perhaps.

[debtisbad]

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

They are!

OK, so the essence of the debate is whether or not the banks are proactively doing this, or whether they are shying away from it.

[Angry Cat]

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

8
Leclerk, maybe there is a misundestanding. I thought the banks were supposed to contact people that may have been mis-sold PPI.

They are!

The High Court ruling states: "There is no doubt that the rules on root cause analysis are lawful. The guidance that the discovery of systematic problems should lead to compensation for non-complainants is lawful."

[leclerc]

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

8
Leclerk, maybe there is a misundestanding. I thought the banks were supposed to contact people that may have been mis-sold PPI.

If they've complained then they should follow through with the complaints process until it has been resolved without the FOS or has gone to the FOS for resolution.

[debtisbad]

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

The only companies contacting customers are Welcome Finance who are in default. The banks do not have to pro actively contact customers about PPI. Has there been a misunderstanding here? maybe
Do we mean that banks have to contact customers who have already put a complaint in or are people saying that banks have to proactively contact everyone who was provided with PPI to see if they were missold them?

8
Leclerk, maybe there is a misundestanding. I thought the banks were supposed to contact people that may have been mis-sold PPI.

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

Egg, did not sell off the problem to a debt buying firm, the PPI problem remains with them, or should I say now Barclays.

No contact letter has been received by the complainant, as is required.
So, where on earth does this backlog figure of 5,999 come from?

It is total RUBBISH!!!

Yep, would seem so.

So you had a 'good' account with egg and thats how they treat you. the naff ones, like mine, were sold to Arrow Global, who have instructed a DCA to pursue, despite the prior dispute over the PPI sold by Egg.

[Angry Cat]

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

that'll be egg for ya

Egg, did not sell off the problem to a debt buying firm, the PPI problem remains with them, or should I say now Barclays.

No contact letter has been received by the complainant, as is required.
So, where on earth does this backlog figure of 5,999 come from?

It is total RUBBISH!!!