Tweet
Re: Latest updates on PPI Judicial Review and claims on hold
Hello all.
Please excuse my lack of intelligence on this subject but as I have stated previously there is a hell of a lot of info to take in.
My question is quite simple.
My dad took PPI because the MBNA made him feel his loan could/would not be processed without it. He was made to feel for his loan to be processed he basically needed PPI. Plain and simple. He knows now that is not the case. He now knows his loan could of been processed without PPI. Or if he wanted PPI he could get it from another source. MBNA did not make him aware of these points and so they were in wrong.
Surely MBNA and banks in general can not justify in any way shape or form making customers feel 'they needed PPI'. Can they?
Can a court really rule that the above working practices are acceptable? How? Seriously how? As I said before I'm not very knowledgeable on the whole PPI subject. However I am intelligent enough to know that banks have deceived, with held information, cheated and used scare tactics to their customers. No matter what way you look at it. They have took advantage of customers wanting loans and the banks knew they would agree to anything to help their application. This is deception on the grandest scale. No matter when you were missold PPI or how you were missold it, surely no judge in the land can justify their selling practices? I'm assuming there is no rules anywhere which does allow the banks to with hold information and to not inform customers they can get PPI from another source and that they can use the line 'your loan has better chance of approval with PPI'? If you have solid proof you have been missold PPI then is it not pretty much a black and white case with no grey areas?
What kind of society will we be living in if the legal process does rule in favour of the banks?
Hello all.
Please excuse my lack of intelligence on this subject but as I have stated previously there is a hell of a lot of info to take in.
My question is quite simple.
My dad took PPI because the MBNA made him feel his loan could/would not be processed without it. He was made to feel for his loan to be processed he basically needed PPI. Plain and simple. He knows now that is not the case. He now knows his loan could of been processed without PPI. Or if he wanted PPI he could get it from another source. MBNA did not make him aware of these points and so they were in wrong.
Surely MBNA and banks in general can not justify in any way shape or form making customers feel 'they needed PPI'. Can they?
Can a court really rule that the above working practices are acceptable? How? Seriously how? As I said before I'm not very knowledgeable on the whole PPI subject. However I am intelligent enough to know that banks have deceived, with held information, cheated and used scare tactics to their customers. No matter what way you look at it. They have took advantage of customers wanting loans and the banks knew they would agree to anything to help their application. This is deception on the grandest scale. No matter when you were missold PPI or how you were missold it, surely no judge in the land can justify their selling practices? I'm assuming there is no rules anywhere which does allow the banks to with hold information and to not inform customers they can get PPI from another source and that they can use the line 'your loan has better chance of approval with PPI'? If you have solid proof you have been missold PPI then is it not pretty much a black and white case with no grey areas?
What kind of society will we be living in if the legal process does rule in favour of the banks?
Comment