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

[ncf355]

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

The banks do not have to pro actively contact customers about PPI. Has there been a misunderstanding here?
Do we mean that banks have to contact customers who have already put a complaint in or are people saying that banks have to proactively contact everyone who was provided with PPI to see if they were missold them?

See my quote in post 4537 above!

The terms detailed within PS10/12 as I quoted above clearly state the banks have to consider proactively (HOW wet??!!) contacting customers that have not complained, where they have identified a systematic issue (for instance calls made to sell PPI for a certain credit card between certain dates ?)

............

"(2) consider whether it is fair and reasonable for the firm to undertake
proactively a redress or remediation exercise, which may include
contacting customers who have not complained"

[EXC]

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

I think AC means that PS10/12 required the banks to actively seek current and previous customers (by contacting them directly, rather than waiting for the customer to complain) where they identified a pattern of misselling on a certain product line

Gotcha. But the Root Cause Analysis requirements are a far cry from contacting all customers who were mis-sold PPI.

According to the Policy Statement the banks were originally required to begin implementation of RCA in Q1 2011 but presumably the banks took it upon themselves to put that on hold pending the JR so I doubt that any customer contact exercises have started yet.

It's a good point though and I think I'll FoI the FSA to find out what the current timetable is and what progress has been made.



While firms should also implement by this date the guidance on root cause analysis
and firms’ obligations to consider the position of non-complainants who may have
been affected by recurrent sales problems, we would not expect firms (absent specific
imperatives to the contrary) to commence any own initiative actions they consider required
as a result (e.g. consumer contact exercises) until six months after this PS is published i.e.
until mid Q1 2011 (though firms may of course choose to commence such actions sooner).
This will give firms time to prioritise initially the efforts required to implement the fair and
compliant handling of PPI complaints.

We will also undertake a staged approach to monitoring the robustness of firms’
root cause analysis of PPI (see also paragraphs 2.18–2.20), but we will run this work
one quarter year behind the complaint-focused work, that is:

Early Q1 2011: we will write to several firms (selected on a risk/impact basis)
asking them for a detailed self-report on what root cause analysis they have done,
the results of this, and what steps they are planning as a result concerning changing
sales practices going forward and/or treating non-complainants fairly.

Q2 − Q4 2011: we will carry out (and/or potentially ask skilled persons to report on)
detailed and intensive reviews of the approach to root cause analysis of several firms
(again selected on a risk/impact basis) and, in particular, their consideration of, and
where appropriate the scope and fairness of, their own initiative actions towards noncomplainants,
and the effectiveness of these actions in giving relevant non-complainants
redress or proper opportunity to obtain it.

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

[Angry Cat]

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

I was chatting with a friend last evening who had logged formal complaints about being mis-sold PPI. These complaints like mine were made some time ago and well prior to the JR.

The Banks involved were: Egg, MBNA, Capital One and TPF/RBS.

Egg, refused to correspond further but stated that all letters received had been filed;
TPF, stated similar.

The other two complaints were made directly to both CapOne and MBNA, even though the accounts had been sold to Link and RobbersWay, who infrequently send out begging letters.

None of the four aforementioned banks have made any contact whatsoever with the complainant since the JR.

[The Debt Star]

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

that'll be egg for ya

[Angry Cat]

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

that'll be egg for ya

Egg, did not sell off the problem to a debt buying firm, the PPI problem remains with them, or should I say now Barclays.

No contact letter has been received by the complainant, as is required.
So, where on earth does this backlog figure of 5,999 come from?

It is total RUBBISH!!!

[The Debt Star]

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

Egg, did not sell off the problem to a debt buying firm, the PPI problem remains with them, or should I say now Barclays.

No contact letter has been received by the complainant, as is required.
So, where on earth does this backlog figure of 5,999 come from?

It is total RUBBISH!!!

Yep, would seem so.

So you had a 'good' account with egg and thats how they treat you. the naff ones, like mine, were sold to Arrow Global, who have instructed a DCA to pursue, despite the prior dispute over the PPI sold by Egg.

[debtisbad]

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

The only companies contacting customers are Welcome Finance who are in default. The banks do not have to pro actively contact customers about PPI. Has there been a misunderstanding here? maybe
Do we mean that banks have to contact customers who have already put a complaint in or are people saying that banks have to proactively contact everyone who was provided with PPI to see if they were missold them?

8
Leclerk, maybe there is a misundestanding. I thought the banks were supposed to contact people that may have been mis-sold PPI.

[leclerc]

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

8
Leclerk, maybe there is a misundestanding. I thought the banks were supposed to contact people that may have been mis-sold PPI.

If they've complained then they should follow through with the complaints process until it has been resolved without the FOS or has gone to the FOS for resolution.

[Angry Cat]

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

8
Leclerk, maybe there is a misundestanding. I thought the banks were supposed to contact people that may have been mis-sold PPI.

They are!

The High Court ruling states: "There is no doubt that the rules on root cause analysis are lawful. The guidance that the discovery of systematic problems should lead to compensation for non-complainants is lawful."

[debtisbad]

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

They are!

OK, so the essence of the debate is whether or not the banks are proactively doing this, or whether they are shying away from it.

[leclerc]

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

OK, so the essence of the debate is whether or not the banks are proactively doing this, or whether they are shying away from it.

Not exactly if they are taking the date of implementation as being either April this year or possibly May this year since root cause analysis

"While firms should also implement by this date the guidance on root cause analysis
and firms’ obligations to consider the position of non-complainants who may have
been affected by recurrent sales problems, we would not expect firms (absent specific
imperatives to the contrary) to commence any own initiative actions they consider required
as a result (e.g. consumer contact exercises) until six months after this PS is published"

I am assuming the banks will take a very liberal view on this bit ie they'll state that the timescale will be 6 months after the date of them giving up the ghost, so to speak. It's worth asking the question, I guess to the FSA perhaps.

[Angry Cat]

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

In my view, the Banks are laying in the long grass and will be dragging their heels until the middle of 2012.

However, where there has been systematic failings re: their selling of PPI, these banks must proactively contact those customers affected.
Two examples could be Egg and Capital One who both have been fined by the FSA; there are plenty of other examples

Also, customers who logged formal complaints about PPI that was sold prior to the FSA regulation of same, must also be contacted and the complaints looked at again.

[EXC]

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

Also, customers who logged formal complaints about PPI that was sold prior to the FSA regulation of same, must also be contacted and the complaints looked at again.

Root Cause Analysis only applies to non-complainants I'm afraid.

[TUTTSI]

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

URGENT HELP REQUIRED

Following my conversation today with the production company they have asked me to find someone who has used a Claims Management Company where they have been asked to pay upfront fees, then have been asked to pay further fees to continue with their claim which has then put them in a vunerable situation pushing them into a hardship situation. Can you please urgently PM me if this has happened to you and you would be prepared to take part.

Read more at: Help Required Urgently With Cmc's - Legal Beagles Consumer Forum

[dogtired]

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

Got a very small cheque from BOS yesterday, no indication the the "balance" has now closed this account and when I asked just got put through to Blair Oliver Scott who quoted a completely different outstanding amount and that i should now contact Cabot......