Re: Non advised ppi claim rejection
Dear Chrissie, looking at the bits of the letter they sent to you, it is obvious, that instead of dealing with your particular case - which is very clear and straight forward - they based their decision on the assumption how things should have been done at the time of this sale.
They "believe," you were given all the information, they "assume" the dicuments were sent to you etc.
it is in breach of the FCA regulations, to base their decision on the assumption what might have happened, rather than invistigating your case, where PPI was not suitable and not necessary.
they did not give an advise, but they were under an obligation to disclose to you the exclusions, which they clearly did not, otherwise, you would not have taken that unsuitable for you product.
(FCA guidelines, App. 3.3.9, 3.3.10, 3.3.11 and 3.312 G).
Also I refer you to the relevant FOS documents: "...we look at the circumstances of the actual sale to establish what did happened, rather then what was supposed to have happened".
You were not be eligible at the time of sale as you did have your medical condition then and you can prove that.
The fact that they for some reason do not have it in their files does not change that fact, which is provable.
it shows, however, that either you were not made aware of the importance of that pre-existing condition, as the company failed to inform you what an impact it would have on your eligibility, or it shows their negligence and incompetence as they failed to register that information.
Vxxx
Dear Chrissie, looking at the bits of the letter they sent to you, it is obvious, that instead of dealing with your particular case - which is very clear and straight forward - they based their decision on the assumption how things should have been done at the time of this sale.
They "believe," you were given all the information, they "assume" the dicuments were sent to you etc.
it is in breach of the FCA regulations, to base their decision on the assumption what might have happened, rather than invistigating your case, where PPI was not suitable and not necessary.
they did not give an advise, but they were under an obligation to disclose to you the exclusions, which they clearly did not, otherwise, you would not have taken that unsuitable for you product.
(FCA guidelines, App. 3.3.9, 3.3.10, 3.3.11 and 3.312 G).
Also I refer you to the relevant FOS documents: "...we look at the circumstances of the actual sale to establish what did happened, rather then what was supposed to have happened".
You were not be eligible at the time of sale as you did have your medical condition then and you can prove that.
The fact that they for some reason do not have it in their files does not change that fact, which is provable.
it shows, however, that either you were not made aware of the importance of that pre-existing condition, as the company failed to inform you what an impact it would have on your eligibility, or it shows their negligence and incompetence as they failed to register that information.
Vxxx
Comment