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

[Fortinbras]

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

Angie, Angie, when will those clouds all disappear?
Angie, Angie, where will it lead us from here?
With no loving in our souls and no money in our coats
You can't say we're satisfied
But Angie, Angie, you can't say we never tried
Angie, you're beautiful (?), but ain't it time we said good-bye?
Angie, I still love you, remember all those nights we cried?
All the dreams we held so close seemed to all go up in smoke
Let me whisper in your ear: xxx xxxxxx xxxxx!

[debtisbad]

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

She has actually written a blog on the BBA website which goes through her concerns with regards to the ICB recommendations due out on September 12th(link: http://www.bba.org.uk/blog/author/Angela%20Knight )

With regards to the Sky News story, the second picture of the former Rugby player is interesting because he taped the conversation and clearly he was missold the product. Very interesting stuff.

Having read her blog, as expected, it is very one-sided. For example, she states that people have saved less over the last twenty years, so that banks have less money to spend.

I ask, could this be because the banks encouraged people into debt by giving out credit cards like confetti, and by scamming society with mis-sold products such as PPI, pensions, endowments, etc?

Not according to Angie baby. She blames society. All the way through her blog, it's never the fault of the banks.

[leclerc]

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

That's why Angie baby does not want reform-so that the scams can continue.

She has actually written a blog on the BBA website which goes through her concerns with regards to the ICB recommendations due out on September 12th(link: http://www.bba.org.uk/blog/author/Angela%20Knight )

With regards to the Sky News story, the second picture of the former Rugby player is interesting because he taped the conversation and clearly he was missold the product. Very interesting stuff.

[debtisbad]

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

Another day, another mis-selling protection racket exposed.





Banks Accused Of Interest Rate Insurance Scam


A Sky News investigation has uncovered evidence High Street banks deliberately mis-sold interest rate protection, leaving hundreds of firms struggling to meet repayments.

In an interview with Sky News, ex-Hbos and Lloyds TSB employee James Ducker claims banks flouted guidelines and put profits before customers' interests.



The products are known as 'swaps' because the bank and customer exchange or 'swap' loan repayments. If interest rates rise, the bank covers the increase in repayments for the customer.

If rates fall, the customer pays a fee back to the bank.

Investors who entered into 'swap' arrangements claim the risks of low interest rates and exit fees were not explained to them.

Mr Ducker told Sky: "We were selling protection against rates increasing with a lack of consideration if rates fell.

"The bank was protected more than the customer and it was normal practice to emphasise the rewards and de-emphasise the risks.

"The pressure to sell these products was immense. We weren't there to help customers or mitigate their exposure.

"My manager described it to me as giving the customer an umbrella, then when it starts raining taking the umbrella away. "If rates go up, the bank wins. If rates go down, the bank wins. Was it ever explained to the customer in that way? No."

The Financial Services Authority consider 'swaps' so complicated they should only be sold to investment professionals.

But it is claimed they were marketed to amateur investors, who did not understand the risks. Ex-Welsh rugby national Spencer John turned to property investment after an accident left him unable to play.




He claims Barclays offered him a development loan but only on condition a 'swap' was part of the deal. When interest rates fell and Mr John could not afford the higher payments, Barclays charged him a fee of £95,000 to exit the 'swap' - something he insists he was not warned about.

"Barclays put a 'swap' presentation in front of me but it could have been written in Latin for all I knew; I didn’t understand it.

"When I missed a couple of payments, Barclays said I'd broken the deal and charged me £95,000." Mr John had to sell one of his properties to pay the fee and is now taking legal action against the bank.

Barclays claimed it provided Mr John with enough information from him to make an educated choice before entering into the arrangement.

His solicitor, Max Hotham, said: "We're taking enquiries from around the country from small businesses and individuals who are encountering real financial difficulties.

"Not only did Barclays sell 50,000 of these products but the majority of High Street banks were also active in the 'swaps' market."

High Street banks who sold 'swaps' are now bracing themselves for a wave of similar cases brought by firms which have gone into administration after struggling to pay the fees resulting from historically low interest rates.


Sky News Uncovers Evidence High St Banks Deliberately Mis-Sold Interest Rate Protection - Or | Business | Sky News

That's why Angie baby does not want reform-so that the scams can continue.

[Turboman]

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

where does 29 weeks come from?

I was surmising if it was12 weeks after cutoff date.

It would be from 31/12/2011 + 12 weeks (approx 29 weeks from claim date ) now realize its 12 weeks from claim date though

[enaid]

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

"The Financial Sercices Authority consider 'swaps' so complicated they should only be sold to investment professionals."

Nuff said imho, another rip off that has been allowed to carry on by the authorities.

[EXC]

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

Another day, another mis-selling protection racket exposed.





Banks Accused Of Interest Rate Insurance Scam


A Sky News investigation has uncovered evidence High Street banks deliberately mis-sold interest rate protection, leaving hundreds of firms struggling to meet repayments.

In an interview with Sky News, ex-Hbos and Lloyds TSB employee James Ducker claims banks flouted guidelines and put profits before customers' interests.



The products are known as 'swaps' because the bank and customer exchange or 'swap' loan repayments. If interest rates rise, the bank covers the increase in repayments for the customer.

If rates fall, the customer pays a fee back to the bank.

Investors who entered into 'swap' arrangements claim the risks of low interest rates and exit fees were not explained to them.

Mr Ducker told Sky: "We were selling protection against rates increasing with a lack of consideration if rates fell.

"The bank was protected more than the customer and it was normal practice to emphasise the rewards and de-emphasise the risks.

"The pressure to sell these products was immense. We weren't there to help customers or mitigate their exposure.

"My manager described it to me as giving the customer an umbrella, then when it starts raining taking the umbrella away. "If rates go up, the bank wins. If rates go down, the bank wins. Was it ever explained to the customer in that way? No."

The Financial Services Authority consider 'swaps' so complicated they should only be sold to investment professionals.

But it is claimed they were marketed to amateur investors, who did not understand the risks. Ex-Welsh rugby national Spencer John turned to property investment after an accident left him unable to play.




He claims Barclays offered him a development loan but only on condition a 'swap' was part of the deal. When interest rates fell and Mr John could not afford the higher payments, Barclays charged him a fee of £95,000 to exit the 'swap' - something he insists he was not warned about.

"Barclays put a 'swap' presentation in front of me but it could have been written in Latin for all I knew; I didn’t understand it.

"When I missed a couple of payments, Barclays said I'd broken the deal and charged me £95,000." Mr John had to sell one of his properties to pay the fee and is now taking legal action against the bank.

Barclays claimed it provided Mr John with enough information from him to make an educated choice before entering into the arrangement.

His solicitor, Max Hotham, said: "We're taking enquiries from around the country from small businesses and individuals who are encountering real financial difficulties.

"Not only did Barclays sell 50,000 of these products but the majority of High Street banks were also active in the 'swaps' market."

High Street banks who sold 'swaps' are now bracing themselves for a wave of similar cases brought by firms which have gone into administration after struggling to pay the fees resulting from historically low interest rates.


Sky News Uncovers Evidence High St Banks Deliberately Mis-Sold Interest Rate Protection - Or | Business | Sky News

[MBD23]

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

Is it just me---or am I reading it right?

FSA grants temporary extension for some PPI complaints

Re that first link Di----do you think the 16 weeks and 12 weeks are after the cutoff date--or after the claim date

IE-----if I send it on 31/8/2011 they got 16 weeks

if I send it on 1/9/2011 they got 12 weeks

If it was after the cutoff date- then claims on 1/9/2011 would take 29 weeks so that cant be right---soooooooooooooo--I dont want to get it in by end of August---but on 1st September

or am I missing something here??

Read more at: Turboman v Barclaycard PPI - Page 3 - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

where does 29 weeks come from?

[debtisbad]

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

Bill. I agree with what you say. They just want to go on as ever before, because that's how they make money at the expense of everyone else. Angela Knight is the unacceptable face of the banking industry.

[Bill-K]

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

I dunno - I'm just an iggerent ape - but it seems to me that our Angie has re-opened a wound that might have been better left to heal by itself. Stupid bitch.

The banks have - as far as I can see - been the cause of our economic downturn in the past few years. If not - then they most CERTAINLY have NOT been of any help in alleviating it. Whatevva. They have been of NO use to OUR economy, either way. Perhaps they have been of use to their own private economies - The Bank of Fred Goodwin is a prime example, and I'm sure that our be-Knighted Angie will already have her stash secured, likewise.

The feckin' economy has been a victim of the banks, and as such, any reforms should recognize that. THAT is NOT the way it was supposed to work, was it ?

What is she now trying to put off ? Her demise - and thus her inevitably obscene pension.

IMHO, the sooner the UK economy is divorced from these shysters, the better. But - ever the realist - I shall instead embark upon my plan B...

Porcine Flying Lessons.

[debtisbad]

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

A further article about the banks trying to avoid reform:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...m-2345954.html

[Bill-K]

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

....

...On the item headed Total PPI Premiums Paid-£589.16 we should expect this to be 15.7% of the Payments made + The settlement Figure (ie the settlement figure is also 15.7% towards the outstanding part of the balance attributable to PPI)
Well spotted, mate. The settlement payment is, in effect, the final payment - and as such, it does indeed include apportioned PPI.
In most cases-Settled Loans are settled well before the loan finish date - and this is where the big reclaim amount kicks in + 8% on a big amount
Yes, indeedy - this often accounts for a b100dy big slice of the PPI claim amount.
In the early days-we have seen cases where lenders conveniently forgot the "Settlement Amount" paid.
Clearly, this is still going on, and we still need to be vigilant. This just goes to show that there is still a need for super-heroes such as yourself.

As for gorillaz...on the brink of extinction. Just TOO b100dy bolshy !!!

[Turboman]

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

the scans are what LloydsTSB are sending out to successful recipients including a page on how they calculate redress.

Just a point to watch on cases like Example 2

"Settled Loans" are where a sum is paid to finish the loan -(say) outstanding balance + about 1-2 months interest (say) or Rule of 78.

From reading stuff in Understanding PPI Calculations-you will understand (I hope) that one calculates the actual PPI Premiums paid in the ratio of (PPI Loan:Total of Cash Loan+PPI SPI Loan)----ie 15.7% in this case (doing this takes account of under and over payments + increases over the original set PPI Payment.)

On the item headed Total PPI Premiums Paid-£589.16 we should expect this to be 15.7% of the Payments made + The settlement Figure (ie the settlement figure is also 15.7% towards the outstanding part of the balance attributable to PPI)

In most cases-Settled Loans are settled well before the loan finish date - and this is where the big reclaim amount kicks in + 8% on a big amount

In the early days-we have seen cases where lenders conveniently forgot the "Settlement Amount" paid.

[When I've got my claim in-I'll go back to the Understanding PPi..... and finish off the threads on Rebates,Refunds and Settlements]

[EXC]

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

Angela Knights comments being reported may well be a lot less cos the news currently is more about Libya, prior to that, the riots

Which reminds me of the BBA's 'quote of the week':

''Rob a shop, go to jail. Rob the nation, get a bonus''.

[EXC]

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

Is it just me---or am I reading it right?

FSA grants temporary extension for some PPI complaints

Re that first link Di----do you think the 16 weeks and 12 weeks are after the cutoff date--or after the claim date

IE-----if I send it on 31/8/2011 they got 16 weeks

if I send it on 1/9/2011 they got 12 weeks

If it was after the cutoff date- then claims on 1/9/2011 would take 29 weeks so that cant be right---soooooooooooooo--I dont want to get it in by end of August---but on 1st September

or am I missing something here??

Read more at: Turboman v Barclaycard PPI - Page 3 - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

That's the way I read it too.

• PPI complaints received after the conclusion of judicial review but on or before the 31 August will be responded to within 16 weeks; and
  
• PPI complaints received on or after 1 September and before 31 December 2011 will be responded to within 12 weeks