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

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Makes sense, but can you say what claims would be affected NOW by a Judicial review to look at rules due to come in in December ?

When I get a response to the clarification and if it is a bit flimsy then we should ask that question(although it might be December before I get their response, lol!!!)

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

I bet barclays don't even know what is or isnt affected by the JR.

(mainly cause nothing is and its a publicity ploy to get people to give up)

I agree: no complaints currently under consideration should be effected by the JR as the ''new'' rules governing complaints handling which are the subject of the Judicial review don't come into effect until December.

At the very least, complaints that are due to be given a final determination by a bank by 1 December cannot possibly be effected.

It's ironic that the banks are challenging the retrospectiveness of the ''new'' rules but are in fact are being preemptive in the application of the existing ones.

[The Debt Star]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

complaints that are due to be given a final determination by a bank by 1 December cannot possibly be effected.

would they not delay their final decisions until after this date though?

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

would they not delay their final decisions until after this date though?

What I'm saying is that they should give their final determination 8 weeks from the time the complaint was made. They have a duty to do this. If that 8 weeks falls before the 1 December there is no justification for delaying the final response in lieu of ''new rules'' which don't yet exist and may only apply because the bank was delinquent in it's obligation to the 8 week timeframe.

[The Debt Star]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

What I'm saying is that they should give their final determination 8 weeks from the time the complaint was made. They have a duty to do this. If that 8 weeks falls before the 1 December there is no justification for delaying the final response in lieu of ''new rules'' which don't yet exist and may only exist because the bank was delinquent in it's obligation to the 8 week timeframe.

Thanks for that clarification. I'm sure that helps a lot of peeps, myself included.

[marshallka]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

I bet barclays don't even know what is or isnt affected by the JR.

(mainly cause nothing is and its a publicity ploy to get people to give up)

Its just a pity they do not have to justify their reasons for holding complaints?

Surely they should at least give solid reasons to the consumer for doing this in the letter they write back and not just that it is affected by the JD... its hardly something that any consumer actually understands as everyone is posting asking why?????

Shouldn't it not come under treating customers fairly? Its hardly fair to just say we are holding it back cause we have an argument going with the FSA and FOS and your complaint comes into the argument. I think I would be inclined to write back and ask them to explain themselves and give solid reasons as to why the complaint actually falls into this catergory if it actually does. Has anyone tried it and then taken to the FOS if after 8 weeks they do not reply? ANother complaint type thing!! Also everyone needs to bombard the FSA with complaints. They have done jack up to yet!!!

[EXC]

Thanks for that clarification. I'm sure that helps a lot of peeps, myself included.

It's just my view though.

Having said that, if the banks lose the JR I assume that all the complaints erroneously put on hold will then have to be dealt with under the ''new'' and more stringent complaints criteria so they could be shooting themselves in the foot.

The FSA has already extended the introduction deadline for the ''new'' rules by over 2 months anyway and in fact banks don't have to comply with some for 6 months:

Next steps
1.17 We have extended the time available to firms for implementing our Handbook
provisions concerning the assessment of PPI complaints (from one month, as
proposed in CP10/6, to over three months from the publication of this PS). So
firms need to have regard to the Handbook provisions from 1 December 2010.

1.18 We have also allowed that, unless there are particular imperatives to the contrary,
any own initiative actions by firms toward non-complainants need not commence
until six months after the publication of this PS (i.e. mid Q1 2011).6


http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps10_12.pdf

[di30]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Back a few weeks ago I e-mailed the FSA about the JR, this was when it first came about and just opened my e-mail to the response, its nothing new but thought I would post it here anyway.





Our Ref:


In order that we can deal with this matter as quickly as possible please do not delete the Subject line of this email when you reply. You can add further wording to it but please do not remove "

Dear Mrs

Thank you for your email dated 11 October 2010 concerning the decision by certain banks to stop handling PPI complaints.

I would like to provide some information concerning PPI complaints which may be helpful to you. We have proposed a package of measures to reform the PPI market and protect consumers. The package will ensure customers are treated better when buying PPI and more fairly when complaining about it. Firms have to put these measures in place by 1 December 2010.

Some banks have challenged these new rules in court. The court is considering the arguments and may not reach a decision for some months. In the meantime, firms should go on assessing and answering PPI complaints. However, we are aware that some firms, including Lloyds TSB, have made a decision to cease handling PPI mis-selling complaints. In the interests of consumers, firms will be expected to continue handling complaints while the judicial review is ongoing.

If a firm tells you that it won't give you an answer to your PPI complaint until after the court case, then you can take your complaint directly to the Financial Ombudsman Service for a decision if you don't want to wait for the firm's future answer. The Financial Ombudsman Service's work deciding complaints is going on as normal and has not been affected by the court case.

Helpful information on this and PPI complaints can be found on our website at:

PPI changes challenged: Can you still complain?

If you have any future questions on financial services and products, you may find it easier to call our Consumer Helpline on 0845 606 1234 (call rates may vary). You can also access relevant information online at

Consumer information

and via the Consumer Financial Education Body's website:

Home page : CFEB Moneymadeclear
.

I trust that I have been able to clarify the situation regarding handling of PPI complaints. As advised, if the firm put your complaint on hold then you should contact the Ombudsman to pursue your complaint. I wish you all the best in reaching a positive resolution.

Yours sincerely


L
Customer Contact Centre
Financial Services Authority
Consumer Helpline: 0845 606 1234 (call rates may vary)
Consumer information

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

Back a few weeks ago I e-mailed the FSA about the JR, this was when it first came about and just opened my e-mail to the response, its nothing new but thought I would post it here anyway.

Although it's nothing really new it's always worth asking.

I'm still waiting on the Administrative Court for the FSA's Acknowledgment of Service. In the meantime I've whacked off an FoI to the FSA.


Dear Sir/Madam

I wish to make a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

The information I require is as follows:

1) Please supply me the FSA’s responses to all requests under the Freedom of Information Act made by the British Banker’s Association (BBA) and/or any individual acting on behalf of the BBA, from the beginning of 2010 to date.

2) Please supply me with the FSA’s response to the BBA’s Letter Before Action in respect of the BBA’s Judicial Review application against the FSA of 8 October 2010 (Administrative Court ref CO/10619/2010).

I have considered this request carefully, checking each item requested against the exemptions contained within the act and I am confident that on this basis and on the basis of precedence, all of the information I have requested should be released. To be clear, if for any reason it is not, I fully intend to request an internal review and, failing that, a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

Yours faithfully

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

It's just my view though.

Having said that, if the banks lose the JR I assume that all the complaints erroneously put on hold will then have to be dealt with under the ''new'' and more stringent complaints criteria so they could be shooting themselves in the foot.

The FSA has already extended the introduction deadline for the ''new'' rules by over 2 months anyway and in fact banks don't have to comply with some for 6 months:

Next steps
1.17 We have extended the time available to firms for implementing our Handbook
provisions concerning the assessment of PPI complaints (from one month, as
proposed in CP10/6, to over three months from the publication of this PS). So
firms need to have regard to the Handbook provisions from 1 December 2010.

1.18 We have also allowed that, unless there are particular imperatives to the contrary,
any own initiative actions by firms toward non-complainants need not commence
until six months after the publication of this PS (i.e. mid Q1 2011).6


http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps10_12.pdf

What do they mean by "own initiative actions"?

Furthermore mid Q1 is February 2011 which means 6 months goes back to August 2010 but that is very strange....

[EXC]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

What do they mean by "own initiative actions"?

Furthermore mid Q1 is February 2011 which means 6 months goes back to August 2010 but that is very strange....

I think ''own initiative actions'' means identifying systemic failings and proactively reviewing past sales regardless of whether complaints have been made about them.

The 6 months to mid Q1 is right as it runs from the date of the publication of the policy statement - August.

[NLP]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

an interesting point above... the new rules are set to kick into force on the 1st dec, therefore no current ppi complaints fall under their remit...

therefore, how can any complaints up until then, be put on hold? as they are being assessed under current/old rules...

hmmm

[mids]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

As LTSB is Govt owned is it not the Govt that are 'holding' claims? The law is now pretty much irrelevant. There is obviously no justification for a 'hold' but the banks are holding anyway. And people tell me there is no 'stitch up'....laughable.

[leclerc]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

As LTSB is Govt owned is it not the Govt that are 'holding' claims? The law is now pretty much irrelevant. There is obviously no justification for a 'hold' but the banks are holding anyway. And people tell me there is no 'stitch up'....laughable.

The government does not own 100% of LTSB but does have a large shareholding in the bank. There are other shareholders.

[marshallka]

Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold

an interesting point above... the new rules are set to kick into force on the 1st dec, therefore no current ppi complaints fall under their remit...

therefore, how can any complaints up until then, be put on hold? as they are being assessed under current/old rules...

hmmm

I think they were "asked" to start using the new rules asap?
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

As LTSB is Govt owned is it not the Govt that are 'holding' claims? The law is now pretty much irrelevant. There is obviously no justification for a 'hold' but the banks are holding anyway. And people tell me there is no 'stitch up'....laughable.

The goverment said that they would not interfere with the running of the semi state owned banks.