** WON ** Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim - BMW

[cavemanbiggles]

Hello, newbie here after some advice really. In instances where the loan provider (in this instance BMW Financial Services) was non regulated does anybody have an experience of PPI claims against the underwriter?
The FOS have said it's not a problem that the provider was non regulated and they will go after the underwriter, who is regulated.

Now, I was mis sold PPI several different ways, and even though the underwriter had nothing to do with the actual sale of the policies the product they provided was impossible for me to claim on - amongst other things I was self employed at the time of the sale.

Regardless of my claim being successful or not, does anybody on here have any experience of claims against the underwriter and how much power the FOS have in this instance? The FOS say they will look into whether or not there was a relationship between underwriter and provider and go from there. I've been in the queue with FOS for 9 months now, very slow going.

[di30]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi and welcome

I was successful with the underwriter/insurer. I done this myself without the help of the FOS by writing to them with a letter of my own words, and stating what I know their responsibilities are, without the fact of actually holding them liable as such.

Wording a complaint to the underwriter has to be carefully worded.

As the business/broker who sold the policy were not FSA/GISC regulated, this was why I went the underwriter/insurer avenue.

I can inbox you my letter if you wish. You can use it to help you, tweak to your requirements.

Please let me know, cheers ;-)

[cavemanbiggles]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Yes thanks, fire it through. London General Insurance rejected my claim in April of last year, and it has been in the queue with the FOS ever since.
They say irrespective of any relationship between them and BMW they did not carry out the activity that my complaint relates to, then go on to say BMW are regulated by the FSA (which they were not at the time) and have forwarded my complaint to them to decide who is responsible. BMW then wrote to me again (my initial complaint went to them) stating all of the agreements were pre 2002 thus time barred, which they are not!
Will me writing to the underwriter after the underwriter issued their final response affect / jeopardise what the FOS will be doing when they get around to my complaint? Cautious not to the wrong thing here, but keen to do all I can.

[MG1878]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi Di, I'm in the same sitaution here and I am struggling to get anywhere with my complaint.

Can you send me a copy of your letter, I am beginning to loose faith in "The System" and any help would be appreciated!!!! :|

[di30]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi there

Yes just about to dig it out and send it, check your pm soon

[LewtonPI]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi Di,

I would be obliged if you could forward me a copy of your letter as well

Many Thanks

Lewton

[di30]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Will pm you shortly with it x:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[tomag]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi Di

Would it be possible to have a copy of your letter to the underwriter

thanks

[di30]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

I shall pm you shortly.:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[cavemanbiggles]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

I received a letter last week from the FOS and after three years of legals the Underwriter has accepted responsibility for the sale of my PPI. The FOS say my case will now be examined by an Adjudicator and a decision made. Any ideas how this might pan out? Bearing in mind I was self employed at the time, PPI was single premium and none of the exclusions were properly explained to me. To quote the FOS:

"In cases involving non-advised sales, we would expect a financial business to have given the consumer information that is clear, fair and not misleading... this includes the need to draw the consumer's attention to any significant terms and conditions of the policy."

I am sure there will be further hurdles to overcome, but at least somebody is liable should things fall in my favour.

[CRAZY:HORSE]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi Di !

Any chance of the template letter thingy? thanks :o)

[PPIking]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Just found this thread, which lays out exactly the situation I am in right now.........

As such, would appreciate hugely if you can share your experiences and tips used to get a successful outcome. I am in a similar position with a PPI policy sold in April 1999 - BMW Financial Services shelved responsibility on the dealership who sold me the car on a HP agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, to which a PPI policy has been embedded (i.e. one single agreement that details the HP and PPI policy). No joy with the dealership either, but they have passed on details of the underwriter, including the underwriter's email address for lodging complaints, which implies that I should take the matter up with them.

As such, would appreciate if I could have a copy of Di's letter. Many thanks.

[Amethyst]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

It's not a template but based off old letter of Di's lurking about the place - does this help at all ? Presumably you are just making the complaint you already made to BMW and the dealer to the underwriter so can just copy over the details of misselling allegations on to the letter to the underwriter. Really the important bit is that the underwriters are jointly liable for the actions of the intermediatry who actually sold the policy.

It's just a bundle of words really so have a fiddle with it to make it suit your circumstances and include any letters you've had from BMW / Dealer etc about the policy and your complaint to date.


---------------------------------------------
Dear Sir/Madam

BMW Financial Services // Dealership Name // Underwriter Name
REFERENCE: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was passed your details on request by DEALERSHIP. I had previously made a complaint to BMW Financial Services regarding the misselling of Payment Protection Insurance attached to a Hire Purchase Agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. BMW FS have informed me that the policy was missold to me by xxxxxxxxx Dealership, and they have given me your address as the underwriters of that policy. BMW have also confirmed that as they were not regulated by the FSA ( now the FCA ) that I should be talking to yourselves as underwriters.

The account is no longer active, and was settled some years ago. The HP agreement and PPI policy was taken out in April 1999 and my address at that time was xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx . This should be sufficient information for you to locate my policy details.

THEN PUT YOUR REASONS FOR SAYING THE POLICY WAS MISSOLD [/FONT]

In my opinion, the policy was wrongly sold to me, and there should have been an obligation to provide customers with the appropriate information, and should have been in good time for the customers to make an informal decision to take the cover. In cases involving non-advised sales, it is expected that a financial business would have given the consumer information that is clear, fair and not misleading... this includes the need to draw the consumer's attention to any significant terms and conditions of the policy. This was not done.

Upon researching the issue further, it appears that the Underwriters (yourselves) have a responsibility when a policy is sold to a customer by using a Intermediary, even if the Insurer/Underwriter are not present at the sale of the policy. The Underwriter has joint liabilities with the Intermediary, as it is understood as they sell products on behalf of the Insurer/Underwriter and the applications are referred back to the Insurer/Underwriter who have a duty to check and ensure that the cover suits the customer’s full requirements. This would include evaluating an individual before issuing the policy, as it is also very important that the Insurer/Underwriter must perform and must analyse the client’s risk before hand, for example as exclusions may exist. Therefore it is also the responsibility of the Insurer/Underwriter to determine whether they should be accepted or rejected.

This does not appear to have happened in my case. Therefore I am holding your company responsible for failing your duties. Your business had a duty to ensure that your intermediary sold the product to me fairly, and it is my case that they did not.

I trust that you will consider refunding me the amount I paid to the policy, along with the relevant interest on each payment made. I would also appreciate further redress for the distress & inconvenience this has caused me to try to get this matter resolved in full.

I look forward to hearing from you in relation of this matter no longer than 8 weeks as from the date of this letter. If I fail to hear from you within that timescale, I will forward the details on to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) for them to investigate further.

Yours sincerely

[PPIking]

Re: Pre 2005 Underwriter Claim

Hi Amethyst,

This is perfect, thank you.

Further to what I have noted in my post above, below are some salient points that perhaps make my situation succinctly different to the circumstances noted in Di's letter in your post.
1. Neither BMW Fin. Services nor the dealership have actually stated in any of their communication to me that they weren't regulated at the time (in April 1999). I assumed this was because it was due to the HP agreement I signed was a 'Hire-Purchase Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974' (I have a copy of this agreement). Could this be why, and does it change anything?

2. BMW Financial Services confirmed in writing on 23/06/2017 that the PPI policy wasn't a BMW branded product, but last week the dealership has denied this fact and had stated that they cannot sell policies that are not approved by BMW. At present I am awaiting a response from BMW FS with an explanation regarding this contradiction. However, given that the PPI policy was embedded within the HP agreement one would think the dealership is correct. Further, the HP agreement is signed just below a sentence stating "Signature on behalf of BMW Financial Services (GB) Limited accepting this Agreement", and the monthly direct debit included a PPI element, and was paid to BMW Fin. Services, so they would have received the funds.

Given the above, and if indeed BMW Fin. Services have chosen to avoid responsibility by withholding the truth, what is the likely impact on my case?

Is it also advisable to enclosed supporting documentation with my complaint, such as a signed copy of the HP agreement (showing the PPI details), supporting documents as to why I don't believe the PPI policy would have been suitable, even though I was in full-time employment etc?

Many thanks.

[Mrmonty3005]

Hello, I am in the early stages of trying to recover ppi from pre 2005 from Carrington Carr. I have written to the companies associated with the policy and then to the FSCS after being knocked back and they don’t want to know either. If anyone could offer advice as to my next step that would be appreciated. I might add Carrington Carr are no longer trading. Thanks again.