Underwriter success PPI

[marshallka]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Like Marshallka's case with the FOS and them requesting to use that avenue - insurer/underwriter, almost 100% of the time they come back a long time later to say they could not establish a relationship, yet often if you forward your complaint to the FOS via broker, but they are not regulated, the FOS comes back with the details of the underwriter for you, they say they have been looking for the underwriter/insurer of the business of the broker and suggest going that avenue because they were the underwriters of that particular business - then as stated above a long time later they come back to say they cannot establish a relationship.......

So why did the FOS name them and say to pursue them!

That is why I decided to take on the challenge myself with a few last cases direct to the underwriter, because I know I would have been told the same thing by the FOS years later.

Something to raise with the FCA perhaps??

Yep Di, something very very fishy with this stance I would think and the only thing I can think of is the fact of court issues and stalling a court issue as its 3 years since you became aware isn't it?

If FOS are taking years to come back with "no relationship" then your 3 years are up and you always are given the option of FOS and court.

I just want an explanation from FOS as to why they told me there was no connection between Firstplus and Cassidy Davis, Jubilee Insurance now, when it looks like they actually had a contract and a contract to me is a connection. They were contracted to Firstplus. I realise that Firstplus are telling consumers they used a broker (as this perhaps breaks the chain of agencies) but why is it that so many do not recall using brokers. I know that my "broker" (according to their paperwork) was paid commission at 5% on ONLY the loan and nothing on the PPI which is why I always maintained that FIRSTPLUS sold the policy AFTER I applied and they did. FOS always takes the word of the lenders when this Is being said and its so very wrong.

I want to know WHY they do this. Where is the actual PROOF that consumers used an unregulated broker? To me its just convenient and of course all these unregulated brokers go bump and the FSCS will not take on earlier cases. ALL very convenient and almost calculated.

[Victoria27]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Thank you, darling Di, for that useful information.
It would be very helpful for a lot of people.
Xx

[di30]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Thank you Victoria x

Once the Ombudsman has completed the case, then that is usually final, but they do have a Manager, but the manager just like the Assessor will not look into the merits of the complaint but the service of the complaint.

So if this is the case, you then ask the Adjudicator that dealt with your case for the Ombudsman for the details of their manager, they will write back to say they will look into the points given and get back by a certain time, will have to double check on that timescale, then if your not happy with the managers outcome you can finally raise it up with the Assessor, but again just about the service of the complaint and not the merits of the case unfortunately.

Unless anyone knows differently, I will of course be happy to hear :tinysmile_twink_t2: x x

[Victoria27]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Yes, Darling Di.
It might be an issue to raise with the FCA.
Are there still some avenues left to explore within the highest level of the FOS, where it is possible to alert them about that particular subject prior to taking it to the FCA?
If they fail to look into it properly, then to take it to the FCA.
Xx

[di30]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Like Marshallka's case with the FOS and them requesting to use that avenue - insurer/underwriter, almost 100% of the time they come back a long time later to say they could not establish a relationship, yet often if you forward your complaint to the FOS via broker, but they are not regulated, the FOS comes back with the details of the underwriter for you, they say they have been looking for the underwriter/insurer of the business of the broker and suggest going that avenue because they were the underwriters of that particular business - then as stated above a long time later they come back to say they cannot establish a relationship.......

So why did the FOS name them and say to pursue them!

That is why I decided to take on the challenge myself with a few last cases direct to the underwriter, because I know I would have been told the same thing by the FOS years later.

Something to raise with the FCA perhaps??

[marshallka]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Ha ha Turbo. I wondered where you were!!!

Yep, I am wanting to rack everyone else's brains for once. Mine is only half what it used to be LOL - literally pmsl.

I am just wanting confirmation really but I have done my best to find all this out and trying in the background for something really that I cannot let lay to rest.

Thanks for all the input above. I will have a read when and post back laters.

[Victoria27]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Dear Turbo, thank you!

It is wonderful to have such a great team here. LB are the best.

Sorry, I did not make myself clear in my latest post.

My personal PPI saga is finished, luckily all my cases with 9 companies were upheld.

It is Marshallka who needs advice about those links.
We were discussing it with Marshallka and I thought her arguments were very reasonable, however her fight continues. The FOS does not seem to recognise existing relationships between those companies and establish a connection.
So, I suggested our great minds, including our Di, to step in.

I know about you being a true expert where calculation of the redress is concerned.

Thank you again.

Victoria

[L'pool64]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Hi Marshallka,

i am am completely prepared for anyone to tell me I am absolutely stupid, as long as they can give me a valid reason, why money changing hands for business placed, does not constitute a relationship.

as I see it, the agent/broker/shop, sells a product on behalf of a company. The company then places that business with the underwriters, thus completing the chain.

as an example, Laura Ashley had customers complete an application form for a credit card with ppi. This was then sent to GE Capital, who notified the Underwriters, Genworth. Please some one, any one, please tell me how each of the participants in this chain did not make money from this arrangement? What would the point of it be otherwise?

can you contact the FOS and ask them to explain exactly what they mean?

there has to be a contractural money trail and, to my mind, once there is then you have a relationship.

If you look at the Ombudsman thread you will see a reply from Fred to my query. Unfortunately I will need to ask Fred to clarify as I don't understand the answer.

this is probably not much help to you but, maybe worth a try.

best regards,

:beagle:

[Turboman]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Marshallka is a very popular lady.
I hope soon somebody will be able to help with this mess with brokers/underwriters links, Lloyds of London, First plus etc.

I am out of my depth with this one. I only rely on common sense and it seems to me logical what Marshallka says.
Di might have some ideas.
Vx

Yep--hang on in there Victoria

Di & Marshy are good at the procedures--

I calculate your expected redress ( or check your offer) when the time comes

[Victoria27]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Marshallka is a very popular lady.
I hope soon somebody will be able to help with this mess with brokers/underwriters links, Lloyds of London, First plus etc.

I am out of my depth with this one. I only rely on common sense and it seems to me logical what Marshallka says.
Di might have some ideas.
Vx

[Turboman]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Hi Di, Turbo, Bill K and all.

Just popped on but still not too well so just a quickie.
......
Take care all and sorry it was short.

xx

Well well well----I take a few weeks off to decorate the house etc...and one of my old friends returns

Best wishes Marshy and glad to see you again xx (keep in touch K)

[Victoria27]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Hi Marshallka, I am not sure. I'll try to find out.
Meanwhile let's see what Di and other experts think. May be they know.
I'll try to investigate.

[marshallka]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

Hi Victoria

It was FOS that told many to make the complaint against the Insurer when a broker was unregulated but I assume that FOS were looking ONLY for a broker/insurer relationship and some years back when I was complaining because the broker was not regulated and FIrstplus would not accept the complaint I was then told that I should try Lloyds of London.? In the end I was told there was no relationship.

Do FOS look for a relationship ONLY between broker and insurer? How can you make a complaint against the insurer to have liability for the sale? I know that FIrstplus and the Insurer have a relationship but what when it is sold by an unregulated broker who went into liquidation. Do you then have to prove a relationship between the broker as well because that would be impossible?

All would have profited though but the only one under FOS jurisdiction is the insurer/underwriter.

[Victoria27]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

What is their, the FOS's, argument, Marshallka?
What is their explanation that there is no relationship after you gave them the links proving that there is a clear connection?

[marshallka]

Re: Underwriter success PPI

We all assume all parties to the PPI product profited from this but FOS seems to be of the view there was no relationship between lender, broker and insurer in the case of LLoyds of London when I complained some years ago. I disagree. How can having a contract (Cassidy Davis now JUBILEE) not be a relationship in the context that FOS meant? Am I missing something here? I am so far behind on this?

Like I say, when I made my complaint to FOS making the underwriter responsible for joint liability, the FOS eventually (after a lengthy time) told me there was not any relationship? Did FOS make a mistake?