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

[The Debt Star]

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

2012 probably

[cappo]

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

guys the banks are the enemy,can,t be much longer now.

[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.

I'm assuming there is no other approach for Joe Public other than join the very long queue at the Financial Ombudsman Service?

The Financial Services Authority have indeed let the consumer down immensely. They are the body which is supposed to keep the banks in check. Yet it is the banks that are telling and dictating to the FSA, the agenda and approach they will take to PPI complaints.

Why?

I'm no expert. However I can only hazard a guess or give an example. When I was younger and broke the rules at school, I was made aware of what I had done and was punished accordingly. If I hadn't been made aware of my rule breaking and punished, I would of continued to break the rules.

How the hell can the FSA let the banks get away with taking the complete and utter p*ss out of them? The banks are making a complete joke of the body that regulates them and the customers which put their trust in them. What other business in the UK could tell it's regulator how it will regulate?

My God, FSA grow a set of balls. Flex a muscle! Show some authority! Do something! Anything! But please don't let the banks take the hand out of you. They have been doing it to customers and tax payers for years. Taking our complaints to the FOS is all well and good if you've the time and patience to wait. However we need immediate and definite action now against the banks! Not tomorrow! Not next week! Not next month! NOW! The FSA have told banks that they must address PPI complaints regardless of the JR. The banks are defying them. And the best solution the FSA can offer us is the join the queue of thousands at the FOS?

Fine the banks! Close them down! Steal their tea bags! Do something! Please! FSA your the bloody regulator! Stop licking up to the banks and do your bloody job!

[EXC]

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

What can I tell you Soapy?

The FSA were set up from the very beginning by Parliament to be reactive rather than proactive and by simply responding to the banks' hold on complaints by saying they'll review their complaints handling procedures at the end of the year, they've fulfilled the consumer protection element of the obligations bestowed upon them. The fact that until that happens many people will have to wait way beyond what any right thinking individual would deem acceptable is not an issue for which the FSA have a remit to address.

If any single entity is to blame then step forwards the Labour Government who designed the FSA and their powers from the ground up with their 'light touch' philosophy of financial regulation. But, of course, for 'light touch' read 'no touch'.

We live in a truly capitalist society where the individual is a lesser being to big business. Like it or not business is king and big business is the price we are paying for democracy.

[pompeyfaith]

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

We live in a truly capitalist society where the individual is a lesser being to big business. Like it or not business is king and big business is the price we are paying for democracy.

And with that does come choice, the days of the consumer being loyal to a business is long gone but unfortunately some consumer still do not see that.

Take my wife for instance she she has always been a customer of Royal London Insurance Co for the contents cover because she gets a 25% discount because an OAP lives here also.

Now I have been telling her for years to get other quotes so today she took me up on that and instead of paying £187 a yr she now pays £46.64 a yr with churchills.

The policies are more or less the same also.

[NLP]

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

Keep the flag flying.. hey lads

lol.

Like the blind leading the blind.

[cappo]

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

And with that does come choice, the days of the consumer being loyal to a business is long gone but unfortunately some consumer still do not see that.

Take my wife for instance she she has always been a customer of Royal London Insurance Co for the contents cover because she gets a 25% discount because an OAP lives here also.

Now I have been telling her for years to get other quotes so today she took me up on that and instead of paying £187 a yr she now pays £46.64 a yr with churchills.

The policies are more or less the same also.


[/COLOR][/LEFT]

way to go:tinysmile_grin_t:

[mishawest]

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.

chaps and chapesses - I have heard aslong the grapevine there is now a commission payment to adjudicators closing cases off.
f information is not provided by the clients then the threat seemingly coming from the fos is that the will take an adverse view of the complaint.
When I say threat I have seen the rejection letters and they are a joke to say the least.
Anybody know if there is any truth is the commission rumour as if this is the case then not only does a customer have to fight the banks it seems they are also having to fight an 'impartial arbitration service'!!

[simoncardnell]

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

Trust me there is some truth in this. The uphold rate for PPI has gone from 89% to 67% (and falling). Claims with poor mis-selling reasons have ALWAYS gone into the FOS. No change in caseload. Change in outcome.

Commission for closing cases doesn't automatically mean bias (it could be closed against the bank). However businesses know the ground, as they're probably fighting their 1000th case and can argue their corner. Consumer will be fighting the 1st- 5th case and are inexperienced. Whos more likely to back down or to make mistakes?

[Class Act]

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

chaps and chapesses - I have heard aslong the grapevine there is now a commission payment to adjudicators closing cases off.
f information is not provided by the clients then the threat seemingly coming from the fos is that the will take an adverse view of the complaint.
When I say threat I have seen the rejection letters and they are a joke to say the least.
Anybody know if there is any truth is the commission rumour as if this is the case then not only does a customer have to fight the banks it seems they are also having to fight an 'impartial arbitration service'!!

I do not think this is the case, as the majority of the adjudicators working on PPI are provided by outsourcing ie they are self employed consultants on a set amount per day!

I believe that the "spike" in rejects is because the FOS are now actually looking at the cases! I know this may sound strange but previous they would write out to the firm for their defence and they would just roll over. This is not happening now for obviuos reasons so the effect is that the FOS are actually looking at the merits of each case!!!!

[leclerc]

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

chaps and chapesses - I have heard aslong the grapevine there is now a commission payment to adjudicators closing cases off.
f information is not provided by the clients then the threat seemingly coming from the fos is that the will take an adverse view of the complaint.
When I say threat I have seen the rejection letters and they are a joke to say the least.
Anybody know if there is any truth is the commission rumour as if this is the case then not only does a customer have to fight the banks it seems they are also having to fight an 'impartial arbitration service'!!

There certainly was in 2004 as this quoted part of the transcript from a Moneybox program from April 2004.

"MERRICKS: We allow staff to build up slightly increased
earnings if they deal with slightly more cases.

A’COURT: Staff do get bonuses if they deal with a lot of
cases and they close them quickly?

MERRICKS: Yes, and so they should.

A’COURT: And you feel that is an acceptable practice in
the Financial Ombudsman Service, which is all about finding
fairness?

MERRICKS: I think we have to combine fairness with
efficiency. I’m entirely relaxed about the notion that we operate
within the kinds of commercial disciplines that actually many of
the staff who’ve come from a background working in a financial
services firm say that the kinds of disciplines we operate here are
nothing like the kinds of disciplines they’ve seen elsewhere, but
they’re entirely used to the idea that they should have some
targets and that if they achieve those targets, and achieve a lot of
top of them, they do feel that it’s not unreasonable to expect that
the organisation rewards them for that.

A’COURT: A bonuses culture is fine for this
organisation?

MERRICKS: It’s not a bonuses culture, it’s part of the, part
of the structure of remuneration and performance in the
organisation, and not one that I think is questioned by anybody.

A’COURT: Perhaps the fact that bonuses are paid might
have been questioned if more people outside the service had
been aware of it before. It's certainly come as news to Mick
McAteer of the Consumers’ Association ...

MCATEER: I certainly wasn’t aware that the Ombudsman
did use bonuses and targets. It was news to me and I’m sure it’ll
be news to many consumers as well. Clearly we would prefer
that the Ombudsman didn’t have to use this particular target and
bonus system. It would be much better if the staff and the
Ombudsman had sufficient resources and staff were well paid
enough not to have to rely on bonuses and targets to actually
boost their salaries. We think that would actually give them more
space and more freedom to actually assess cases better.

A’COURT: The Financial Ombudsman Service probably
wouldn't need targets and bonuses if it was only dealing with the
level of complaints it had originally expected. One suggestion is
that it's some consumers who're to blame for increasing the
Ombudsman's workload by seeking compensation when they
know they don't have just cause. John Goodfellow, current leader
of the UK's building societies, believe many cases are being
submitted as a result of so-called 'compensation culture'..

GOODFELLOW: I do believe that generally within the UK there
is a growing culture of compensation whether they perceive they
have been treated unfairly or not. I think in many cases people
are being driven by pub-talk that if you write in you’ll get money
and hence the Ombudsman is under great stress from the
number of people who’re complaining about endowment mis-
selling.

A’COURT: But in many cases people have a just cause

GOODFELLOW: Of course there are people who have a just
cause. But I think what tends to happen is it becomes a
bandwagon of ‘I can get money if I write in and complain’. And at
the end of the day who pays the price of the bandwagon? The
chances are it’s other policy holders. This isn’t a win-win game
for the consumer it’s a win-lose game for the consumer. As a
Chief Executive I’ve had a letter a few weeks ago from a
customer who said ‘I can’t understand why you’re arguing about
this. The other eight institutions I complained to paid me
compensation’. If you’re not telling me that customer was not
driven by a culture of greed I don’t know what is.

A’COURT: While we know there are others within the
financial services industry who sympathise with John
Goodfellow's outspoken comments on compensation culture
they'll not find support from the Chief Financial Ombudsman …."

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl...ess13april.txt
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Trust me there is some truth in this. The uphold rate for PPI has gone from 89% to 67% (and falling). Claims with poor mis-selling reasons have ALWAYS gone into the FOS. No change in caseload. Change in outcome.

Commission for closing cases doesn't automatically mean bias (it could be closed against the bank). However businesses know the ground, as they're probably fighting their 1000th case and can argue their corner. Consumer will be fighting the 1st- 5th case and are inexperienced. Whos more likely to back down or to make mistakes?

I would also state that banks have departments that solely deal with the Financial Ombudsman Service. It might be the case that many firms are disputing the amount of the award rather than the fact that a case was missold. Upheld cases does not necessarily mean that people are being told that their PPI was missold, but merely that the outcome that they were expecting was not correct with regards to redress.

[pompeyfaith]

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

Lets also not forget the consumers that turn down redress offers as that happens too I turned down two offers because they where not right and is partly the reason my case took as long

[ncf355]

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

One of my cases is currently with the Ombudsman having been turned down by the adjudicator

The reasoning given was farcical

They stated it was a non advised sale, despite the CCA clearly stating "We strongly advise you to take this insurance" (followed up by providing absolutely no details of terms/insurance policy/etc)

As stated previously, when you feel you are battling not only the banks, but also the FoS it becomes a little ridiculous

[pompeyfaith]

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

Yup it seems like the FOS is more interested in seeing that the banks get value for there £500 fee.

And talking about the fee the adjudicator took all the credit for my redress despite the FOS playing no part in it because as I was not impressed with there service to the consumer after turning down two offers which were wrong I took it on my self with the help of this site to work out the right amount.

Once I had put that offer to the bank with my proposal to settle the current loan they snapped my hand off lol

I then put that to the FOS and agreed if I sign and return the FOS acceptance form so they could get there fee from the bank.

I think it very much depends which financial organisation they are dealing with as to regards the service you get from the FOS also

[pompeyfaith]

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

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2011/02/...o-soar-245618/