Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Di,

It will indeed, but remember they may try to not disclose everything to you, however we will cross that bridge should it ever arise.

Thanks PF, yes I did notice it said something like that on the FOS (SAR) website, still it should be interesting I'm sure. Cheers x

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

SAR posted (signed for delivery), will check the status of this on Monday.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Been having a browse around, and there doesn't seem to be that much details about Mortgage Packagers, I take it these are no longer used then?

Did find a little something though.

http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/Jo...ement_2006.pdf

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

When I sent the last lot of evidence, I also enclosed the copy of the "Endeavour Personal Finance" Payment Protection Insurance Policy details of Hamilton, surely this would be proof straight away though, as all Hamilton details are also enclosed within the booklet, below the front page "logo" Endeavour.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

When I sent the last lot of evidence, I also enclosed the copy of the "Endeavour Personal Finance" Payment Protection Insurance Policy details of Hamilton, surely this would be proof straight away though, as all Hamilton details are alao enclosed within the booklet, below the front page "
Makes me wonder if the Adjudicator is turning a blind eye on this, and I have sent stacks of paperwork to show details of how the broker dealt with the loan, with the valuations and employers ref and so on, and he had better pass them all on the ombudsman as well.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Hi Di,

just read the letters you posted, no real surprise there then, I think this one defo needs to be escalated!

To my mind he seems to have missed the point completely, I thought that between yourself and TBD youd managed to make a fairly straightforward case for the agency argument, I just dont think he understands what that means or the implications of it. The very fact EPF paid Click a commision (click wouldnt have worked with them if they didnt) means there was an agency relationship, irrespective of whether there was an actual introducers agency agreement in place (which EPF insisted on, I know as Ive worked for a company that brokered secured loans with them)

I think i've mentioned this before but its worth looking at Wilson v Hurstanger, not a ppi case per se but could be used in this case (the outlaw write up is quite good if you dont want to read the full judgement http://www.out-law.com/page-8928)

To quote the commentary "Significantly, the lender, who had paid the commission knowing that the broker was acting as the agent of the borrowers, was found liable as an accessory to that breach. This meant that the borrowers were entitled to claim equitable compensation directly against Hurstanger." I think this could be extended to cover commision on the ppi product, by inducing the broker to sell by way of commisions it could be argued that they induced a breach of your rights, this could be supplemented with the argument that your original quote didnt include ppi but this was added subsequently wihtout your knowledge. You then expand the argument to make EPF liable using the Hurstanger case as precedent. Once yourve argued EPF liable you replicate the same argument with Hamilton.

I think if you integrate this with TBD's already persuasive argument about agency relationships you could make a very good case.

If yourself and TBD dont mind I'd be keen to see the response you submit, also I'd be more than happy to cast a third eye over it and add any thoughts if either of you think it would be of assitance.

Cheers for this Paul.

That looks rather interesting in regards of the Wilson v Hurstanger case, thanks for posting this and I believe your right in regards of the Adjudicator missing the point, I don't think he knows the difference between credit brokers to mortgage packager agents, if he did he would realise the connections of these parties.
It all still leads back to Hamilton though at the end of the day, the direction they have suggested myself and many others to try in a way of trying to get our money/ppi back to us, so if this is the case there will be lots of cases turned down.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

We have emailed the Adjudicator to confirm we want our case to be reviewed by the Ombudsman as we did not agree with his view on our case, as we believe this have been overlooked.
As he is out of office until 1 August 2011 - we have copied the email to the Team PP15, which is the email address he left to contact if urgent.

This may not be urgent as such to him, but we emailed anyway just to make sure this have been received, due to him not going to be there himself until the following week, which the 5th August the deadline is a week Friday.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

I did some time ago post about this over at MSE where a comment was made as below, it maybe another way to get my refund back but not sure how this works, as he said they won't make Hamilton responsible.





"Any attempt to demonstrate that Hamilton is directly responsible for Click will fail because it wasn't.

However, as I have said previously, you can make a separate complaint against Hamilton that your loss resulted from its breach of the requirement in the GISC code that it must not accept business from an intermediary that did not itself subscribe to the code. The breach should be demonstrable and if you can persuade FOS that, but for the breach, the loss would not have occurred, it should then uphold that complaint."

[Paul210]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

I did some time ago post about this over at MSE where a comment was made as below, it maybe another way to get my refund back but not sure how this works, as he said they won't make Hamilton responsible.





"Any attempt to demonstrate that Hamilton is directly responsible for Click will fail because it wasn't.

However, as I have said previously, you can make a separate complaint against Hamilton that your loss resulted from its breach of the requirement in the GISC code that it must not accept business from an intermediary that did not itself subscribe to the code. The breach should be demonstrable and if you can persuade FOS that, but for the breach, the loss would not have occurred, it should then uphold that complaint."

Not sure how this would work, Hamilton presumably would argue that their intermediary was EPF (presumably they were subscibers to GISC) and that any business between click and EPF was EPF's problem, not Hamiltons.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Not sure how this would work, Hamilton presumably would argue that their intermediary was EPF (presumably they were subscibers to GISC) and that any business between click and EPF was EPF's problem, not Hamiltons.

Yes good point Paul, then it will be back to the beginning again.

Received an email from another Adjudicator in our Adjudicator's absence - in regards of my email to let them know that we do not agree, and will hopefully send further submissions to support this case if we're able to.




Dear Mr and Mrs
,
I confirm safe receipt of your e-mail, dated 24 July 2011. I note that, in addition to your e-mail, you intend to provide further submissions before your file is passed to an ombudsman for a final decision. I understand that Mr ******* asked for your final submissions to arrive by 5 August 2011. If you will be unable to provide your final submissions by this date, and require more time, please contact Mr ******* after he returns to the office on 1 August 2011.


Yours sincerely
K


Adjudicator
Tel: 020 7964
Fax: 020 7964

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

With a bit of luck, TBD will get hold of those details if he is able to, but failing that have you folks any idea of anything I can submit to the ombudsman?

I have not yet made direct contact with any of the insurers - basically I was hoping they would able to confirm the relationship, but as Hamilton was sold to NU (Aviva) then onto Direct Group its unlikely they will know as some years have gone by since this was taken out in 2004.

I do know though that Direct Group was not at all aware of Click Finance but are/was of EPF.
I did though already confirm this and by a copy of their email that I did previously send on to the Adjudicator.

The Adjudicator does not understand this case at all does he?

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Wonder if TBD will manage to get hold of the documents - EPF Packaging Agreement? lol.
I'm sure that would be very useful to this case, fingers crossed.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Have anyone heard from TBD?

Just wondered if he managed to get hold of some info on this up to now.

I know he's a busy guy though.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Does anyone know if the FSA, OFT or maybe the Competition Commissioner will hold details of Mortgage Packaging Agencies?
I have emailed them all lol, but not sure if they will have any answers to this, I have explained the predicament with the FOS as well that the Adjudicator does not seem to understand as such, and told them any info will be a help towards the case being moved on to the Ombudsman.

So will see what happens.

[di30]

Re: Hamilton/HFC/Endeavour - Reclaim PPI

Found some details of the Relationships between a mortgage lender/broker and underwriter, not sure if it's any use to submit to the FOS though??

http://www.ehow.com/print/info_82438...derwriter.html