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

[MrZ]

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

If you make your claim properly, you will be asking for full compensation in the form of interest. You should also state that interest will accrue until the date of payment. The longer they take to pay the more interest will be added to your compensation. Thats not so bad...especially if you insisted on compound interest.

[ncf355]

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

so it takes 8 weeks to first of all receive response: one person to scan the letter, then for someone to input onto a spreadsheet, then for someone to check the amount, then for someone to authorise the amount and then for someone to write to the customer giving a timescale, then for someone to key the amount/or write a cheque which two people might sign. You see, it takes a weeks for each person in the chain to do their jobs. Don't you know, they're busy people :o

This is it

(oh, and BTW dont forget its 16 weeks for the extended timescale!)

even if they didnt have the advanced systems and amount of people at their disposal, it should be carried out quicker than 8 weeks to make a payment

This needs addressing by the media

[stevesouth33]

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

Interestingly of course the FOS don't make the rules they just apply the rule book that the FSA implements. The FSA (who do make the rules) rule book talks a lot about 8 weeks but as far as payment of redress the rule is that the financial business must proceed to 'promptly' pay redress.

I think the other point is that the FSA applied due diligence to the rules it applies on temporary extension of resolution times to ensure that each case is judged on its merits and treated fairly rather than rushed.

I woudl rather they spent longer on my claims and found in my favour than rushed it and didn't.

[leclerc]

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

Totally and utterly scandalous for an organisation that is supposed to be supporting the consumer

Seems a court case is the way to go if you have a strong case!

so it takes 8 weeks to first of all receive response: one person to scan the letter, then for someone to input onto a spreadsheet, then for someone to check the amount, then for someone to authorise the amount and then for someone to write to the customer giving a timescale, then for someone to key the amount/or write a cheque which two people might sign. You see, it takes a weeks for each person in the chain to do their jobs. Don't you know, they're busy people :o

[ncf355]

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

Yes, the FOS told me this at their recent seminar and have confirmed it in writing. They also said that the end of August deadline was to accept or reject the complaint only and a further eight weeks would be allowed to pay. Roll on Christmas!
JDEH

Totally and utterly scandalous for an organisation that is supposed to be supporting the consumer

Seems a court case is the way to go if you have a strong case!

[JDEH]

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

Just thought I'd make everyone aware that FOS have now informed me that all banks are now allowed 8 weeks to actually make payment from the date of your signed agreement to settlement

:tinysmile_cry_t:

Yes, the FOS told me this at their recent seminar and have confirmed it in writing. They also said that the end of August deadline was to accept or reject the complaint only and a further eight weeks would be allowed to pay. Roll on Christmas!
JDEH

[ncf355]

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

The 8 weeks to pay settlement from receipt of the acceptance is in no way new. It is something the FOS have referred to fairly consistently throughout the last 2years in my personal experience. I do recall that at one stage they increased this to 12 weeks for the likes of Lloyds and Black Horse but otherwise the 8 weeks has certainly been around for a long time.

Hi SKV,

in the letter sent to me last week (Friday) acknowledging my signed acceptance, FOS clearly stated they would get involved if the payout had not been received in 4 weeks

[skv123]

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

The 8 weeks was only agreed in the last few days from what I can make out


I dont see it as a good thing when I and many others like me have waited for over 18 months to achieve an agreement to pay and then have to wait for another (ok, "up to") 8 weeks to get the payout, which in RBS' case will probably be cheque so I'll then have4 to wait for that to clear

Also I doubt the 8 weeks is in anyway enforceable by FOS (the 4 weeks wasnt) and I also believe they (as in most banks, not RBS in particular) will take every opportunity to take it up to the day of the 8 weeks, as they seem to be doing (in a lot of cases) with the 16 week initial timeline

It's a P take, straight and simple

The 8 weeks to pay settlement from receipt of the acceptance is in no way new. It is something the FOS have referred to fairly consistently throughout the last 2years in my personal experience. I do recall that at one stage they increased this to 12 weeks for the likes of Lloyds and Black Horse but otherwise the 8 weeks has certainly been around for a long time.

[leclerc]

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

Question: If they uphold a complaint... Do they have to reduce the remaining payments on a loan..?

GE MONEY said sorry we mis-sold it to you, here is your refund yet still looking for the monthly loan payments including the amount paid for the PPI single premuim..?

They should, if the loan is currently active, also re calculate the loan as if it was without PPI which should reduce your loan payments but not the term.
That is how the FOS would decide based on their own manner of calculating redress.

[ncf355]

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

Actually they have 16 weeks to have communicated a full response to the complainant.
Probably important not to refer to it as compensation as in fact it is only a refund with interest, the only compensation can be awarded by a FOS handled complaint and that is usually between £300-£500.

On the eight weeks to pay out, that feels like a good thing, as they have to pay interest up to the very point they issue the refund, so more money in the complainants bank account.

Also they don't need to take eight weeks, they are though allowed a maximum of eight weeks, I got one the other day within three days and to be honest I woudl have rather they took eight weeks as I woudl have got another hundred quid.

The 8 weeks was only agreed in the last few days from what I can make out


I dont see it as a good thing when I and many others like me have waited for over 18 months to achieve an agreement to pay and then have to wait for another (ok, "up to") 8 weeks to get the payout, which in RBS' case will probably be cheque so I'll then have4 to wait for that to clear

Also I doubt the 8 weeks is in anyway enforceable by FOS (the 4 weeks wasnt) and I also believe they (as in most banks, not RBS in particular) will take every opportunity to take it up to the day of the 8 weeks, as they seem to be doing (in a lot of cases) with the 16 week initial timeline

It's a P take, straight and simple

[stevesouth33]

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

Actually they have 16 weeks to have communicated a full response to the complainant.
Probably important not to refer to it as compensation as in fact it is only a refund with interest, the only compensation can be awarded by a FOS handled complaint and that is usually between £300-£500.

On the eight weeks to pay out, that feels like a good thing, as they have to pay interest up to the very point they issue the refund, so more money in the complainants bank account.

Also they don't need to take eight weeks, they are though allowed a maximum of eight weeks, I got one the other day within three days and to be honest I woudl have rather they took eight weeks as I woudl have got another hundred quid.

[ncf355]

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

Sorry Tuttsi, what I said may have been misleading

The 8 weeks is once they agree to make payment -

So 16 weeks to reach a final decision (Yes/No to compensation)

Then a further 8 weeks to actually pay you from that point!

Direct quote from FOS "our service feels that the eight week timescale is reasonable"

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

Well that is not what the Blackhorse are saying on their web site. They state 16 weeks so a bit of a difference. Also notice it does not say payment at that point it says a full response. They are dragging it out far too long IMOH. A good idea would be to check your banks web site to see what they have posted up by way of an announcement like the Lloyds one below. When you do receive those letters make sure that you are being properly reimbursed and put back to a position as if that PPI cover was not in place.


If we received your complaint before 06 May 2011, we will provide a full response as soon as possible, and no later than the end of August 2011.
If we received your complaint on or after 06 May 2011, we will provide a full response as soon as possible, and no later than within 16 weeks

Just thought I'd make everyone aware that FOS have now informed me that all banks are now allowed 8 weeks to actually make payment from the date of your signed agreement to settlement

:tinysmile_cry_t:

[ncf355]

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

Just thought I'd make everyone aware that FOS have now informed me that all banks are now allowed 8 weeks to actually make payment from the date of your signed agreement to settlement

:tinysmile_cry_t:

[EXC]

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