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

[cardinals]

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

Some highlights from the Lloyds statistics 2010 H2:

Uphold rates on PPI:

Black Horse 83%
Lloyds 68%
HBOS 72%

Volume of complaints not closed from that period (on hold)

Black Horse 6,500
Lloyds 44,000
HBOS 21,000

Using their own figures and assuming £1,500 per claim (low side) their liability for PPI for the last six months of last year alone was 104,919 cases at a total of £157 million. (Those closed added to those on hold and applying the uphold rates above)

Only 11.9% of those with live Black Horse PPI have complained so far (no mention of closed PPI)

Cheers

[Angry Cat]

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

They are all on hold - confirmed by their comp dept over phone last week.

Interesting to note that MBNA subscribed to the GISC code of conduct re: the selling of general insurance: e.g. PPI

[cappo]

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

Thanks paul210!

can the fsa not see that the banks are just using the j.r as an excuse now,fine them thats the only language the bankers understand (mind you the customers pay for that in the end)

[SoapyBubbles]

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

Is there really nothing else Joe Public can do about the banks which are using the Judicial Review as a stalling tactic apart from go to the Financial Ombudsman Service?

Why is the FSA not stamping it's 'supposed' authority on the banks rather than telling customers to take their complaint to the FOS?

I'm sure the FOS will and are doing a very good job but they are now overwhelmed with PPI complaints and I'm sure most people are looking at least 1-2 years before they get a decision on their complaint.

Some customers of the banks are elderly people who have worked all their lives and paid all their taxes and are just looking to retire in peace with the cash which banks basically 'stole' from them?

Surely there has to be another approach to banks that use the JR as a stalling tactic rather than just being told to go to the FOS? There has to be more forceful and militant action from the FSA. Quite frankly the banks are laughing at them and the thousands of customers in the queue for a response from the FOS. It really just isn't good enough from the FSA in my humble opinion.

[cappo]

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

Is there really nothing else Joe Public can do about the banks which are using the Judicial Review as a stalling tactic apart from go to the Financial Ombudsman Service?

Why is the FSA not stamping it's 'supposed' authority on the banks rather than telling customers to take their complaint to the FOS?

I'm sure the FOS will and are doing a very good job but they are now overwhelmed with PPI complaints and I'm sure most people are looking at least 1-2 years before they get a decision on their complaint.

Some customers of the banks are elderly people who have worked all their lives and paid all their taxes and are just looking to retire in peace with the cash which banks basically 'stole' from them?

Surely there has to be another approach to banks that use the JR as a stalling tactic rather than just being told to go to the FOS? There has to be more forceful and militant action from the FSA. Quite frankly the banks are laughing at them and the thousands of customers in the queue for a response from the FOS. It really just isn't good enough from the FSA in my humble opinion.

excellently put soapy none of the regulators ever seem to be able to take the banks on,i think it,s a shame as the sentiment has been put on here in the past the banks are running the country and unfortunately sometimes that does seem to be the case, now heard on here tonight that mbna has now put claims on hold,the banks have got to big and powerful to the point where i think they now tell the regulators what to do. apparently the new regulators name has been changed from consumer protection to something totally different might mean nothing on the other hand it might mean a lot as it,s something that unfortunately needs to take consumers protection into account:tinysmile_grin_t:

[mids]

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

My solicitor has told me that there has been a huge fall off in the number of upheld complaints coming from FOS. Does anyone have any thoughts on why this would be the case? I assume the complaints are similar in nature.

[leclerc]

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

The reason for that might be that they are not getting information from the banks to be able to make a decision in respect of cases.

[EXC]

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

And that banks are challenging FOS decisions.

''The Ombudsman service had previously complained that the UK's banks were appearing to be holding off on dealing with PPI Claims in the hope that they would simply go away.

Since then, however, the apparent success rate for PPI complaints has been falling steadily, with just two-thirds upheld in the last quarter of 2010.

However, the FOS said this did not mean that the banks were improving their ability to deal with the complaints properly in the first place.

A FOS spokesman explained that some banks were now choosing to appeal against an initial ruling against them.

He said was artificially depressing the success rate of complainants as their cases awaited a final adjudication at the second stage of the Ombudsman's procedure.''

PPI Claims still on the rise - Money Guardians.

[cardinals]

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

And that banks are challenging FOS decisions.

with just two-thirds upheld in the last quarter of 2010

Italics added for emphasis - which author / PR imbecile thinks that just two-thirds is an improvement in complaint handling? It's still 66.6% in new money!

[leclerc]

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

Italics added for emphasis - which author / PR imbecile thinks that just two-thirds is an improvement in complaint handling? It's still 66.6% in new money!

Click the link at the bottom and you'll spot that it's the journalist themselves that use the word "just". Not all of the article is quoted only the relevant bits which is why EXC has used the "" to specifically refer to the article rather than just his own words.

EDIT: link is on EXC's post so please do not click on the link on my signature

[cardinals]

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

Click the link at the bottom and you'll spot that it's the journalist themselves that use the word "just". Not all of the article is quoted only the relevant bits which is why EXC has used the "" to specifically refer to the article rather than just his own words.

EDIT: link is on EXC's post so please do not click on the link on my signature

Yes, sorry, didn't mean to imply they were EXC's words - cheers

[EXC]

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

Any takers?

Litigation lawyer - City of London - Banking, Insurance & Finance - Job: 1366625

[cappo]

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

Any takers?

Litigation lawyer - City of London - Banking, Insurance & Finance - Job: 1366625

me! well i couid be there teaboy.

[cappo]

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

me! well i couid be there teaboy.

according to the info exc there only paying 300-350 (pounds or hundreds of thousands a year?) my job offer is withdrawn ha ha

[cardinals]

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

Any takers?

Litigation lawyer - City of London - Banking, Insurance & Finance - Job: 1366625

The job description includes negociating settlements so they won't be expecting to be able to defend everything.

I wonder if the litigation market is starting to pick up? I've seen a few '100% compensation' adverts which implies someone is litigating succesfully.

If Alex from Cartoon Bankers is viewing: Have you had any pre Court settlements which covered your costs?

Cheers