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

[cappo]

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

Is Brindle with the BBA or the FOS/FSA?
The FSA produced a booklet on how to complain in 1999
Dont be fobbed off --- financial watchdog tells consumers

someone will tell me if i,m wrong but i think brindle is batting for our team leclerc:beagle:

[EXC]

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

Is Brindle with the BBA or the FOS/FSA?
The FSA produced a booklet on how to complain in 1999
Dont be fobbed off --- financial watchdog tells consumers

Brindle is with the FSA Fountain Court - People - Michael Brindle QC

[leclerc]

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

That makes sense with regards to specific rules of dealing with a complaint, ie that they set out specific details of timescales and referral to the ombudsman serivce.

[cappo]

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

according to one of di,s posts brindle is fsa

[leclerc]

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

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps32_newsletter.pdf

here we go with the first rules around this....

[cappo]

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

oh well guys the die is truly cast now, sent off cap 1,s ppi reclaim form to the fos today cappo v cap 1 here we go and may the best man or woman win

[leclerc]

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

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.u...-report-04.pdf
This is the 2004 report which explained how the ombudsman worked in the three years from 2001 which does include initial processes that they got involved with

[MBD23]

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

We have complied with ICOB and

6 ICOBS

we have not had a situation yet

5 where a firm has said, "We have complied with ICOB and

6 ICOBS," and the Ombudsman says, "You have not complied

7 with the principles," we have held them liable

[EXC]

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

From Barclays' results published today:

''Tackling poor PPI sales practices remains a priority for the FSA who issued a Policy Statement on 10th August 2010 which amends the DISP (Dispute Resolution: Complaints) rules in the FSA Sourcebook for the handling of such complaints. Firms were initially required by the FSA to implement the new measures by 1st December 2010. In October 2010 the British Bankers' Association launched a judicial review of the FSA on the basis that the Policy Statement applies incorrect standards for the management of PPI sales complaints, including retrospective application of rules with higher standards than those in place at the time of sale.''

''These proceedings are also against the Financial Services Ombudsman Service (FOS) which seeks to implement the same standards for the resolution of complaints referred to it. Pending the outcome of the proceedings which took place in January 2011, implementation of the Policy Statement and FOS Guidance is on hold and affected complaints cannot be determined. There is currently no indication of the timetable for judgment. It is not practicable to provide an estimate of the financial effects.''

[di30]

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

Hi folks

I am probably miles behind and its more than likely this have already been posted....lol.

http://www.lloydstsb.com/payment_pro...complaints.asp

[cappo]

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

Hi folks

I am probably miles behind and its more than likely this have already been posted....lol.

http://www.lloydstsb.com/payment_pro...complaints.asp

nice one di

[Class Act]

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

We have complied with ICOB and

6 ICOBS

we have not had a situation yet

5 where a firm has said, "We have complied with ICOB and

6 ICOBS," and the Ombudsman says, "You have not complied

7 with the principles," we have held them liable

So the FOS are basically saying that even if we discount the Principles, the sales still fail ICOB/ICOBS.

Makes you wonder what the BBA are really after here? I know they want to quash the PS and have the FOS re-write the their bit, but what are they really after??

Do they think they can get out of all /complaint/sales if they win this JR??

[Master Yoda]

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

wafty crankers aren't they

[Angry Cat]

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

wafty crankers aren't they

Crafty indeed, Master Yoda...
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

...Makes you wonder what the BBA are really after here? I know they want to quash the PS and have the FOS re-write the their bit, but what are they really after??

Do they think they can get out of all /complaint/sales if they win this JR??

Like, looking through glass!:beagle:

[MBD23]

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

So the FOS are basically saying that even if we discount the Principles, the sales still fail ICOB/ICOBS.

Makes you wonder what the BBA are really after here? I know they want to quash the PS and have the FOS re-write the their bit, but what are they really after??

Do they think they can get out of all /complaint/sales if they win this JR??

no fos are saying one of the reason the bba brought the matter to court, about a case being judged on on the principles, after close to 100,000 claims awarded , not 1 has been awarded compensation on the basis of the principles where the icob/icos has been correct

the fsa and fos just want to keep the flexability for exceptions


seems like the case the bba has brought on this point is really academic


smacks of mischief making me to, wonder if the courts will agree when 1 not one case has faced the dilemna that the bba want clearing up
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Crafty indeed, Master Yoda...
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------


Like, looking through glass!:beagle:

a delay and squeeze on claim numbers at worse, at best some form of damage limitation, seems like the whole case has been brought concerning isue 404 and the obligation to pay back clients compensation who have not yet complained, this seems to be why the bba brought the case , stopping this and anything extra will be a bonus