Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Bazza, I do not think it is so important to get your original form in order to prove that you did not tick the box. They are not saying you applied for PPI at the beginning, but later, on the phone.
It is not clear for me, when according to them, this phone conversation took place, in 1990, if so, it makes it hard to believe that it took them almost 9 years to add the insurance, or
in 1990, which again makes it hard to believe that after 9 years you suddenly decided to apply for it, considering your circumstances did NOT change.

I understand that there is no PPI in your existing available statements from 2001.
Is that so?

It seems to me, they do not really have any reasonable proof that you, yourself, have ever applied for PPI.

Victoria,

Sorry for delay in reply but I have been searching high and low for further details.

Yes you are correct in saying that the issue seems to be why they say the insurance was added 9 years later by this apparent telephone conversation.

Anyway just something else that I have now come across, I found the original Advantage Gold Account banking booklet / package details that I believe were picked-up from my branch. This also included a postal application for a combined / Gold Credit Card account.

Inside there is an Insurance section in which I will post up later, where they state that they 'recommend consideration' in taking out credit card protector and 'don't miss applying for Credit Card Protector, by signing the relevant section of the application form' - how is this optional ?

Until I receive further details (if they have any) I cannot clarify as to what the conversation was in respect of but like I said it was in relation to the opening of the account.

I had copies of statements from May 1999 with the ppi added but I wanted details prior to that in which they did not have.

I do have a Natwest Visa account in which was opened in July 1990 and again ppi added and then balance was transferred to another Visa account in which the last statement that I have is for October 1998 ?

So again I believe that you maybe right in saying that they may not have reasonable proof.

[leclerc]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Why October 2001? I am kinda going off at a tangent so apologies to Victoria as I know the line you are taking is about the issue of PPI and proving misselling and mine is about the issue of statements.

Bazza, no harm in asking the question to NatWest but are they saying that they can only provide statements from October 2001 because their systems migrated over to the RBS Group systems then? If the answer is yes, then point out that NatWest Bank systems did have an archived system which included products taken out which might or might not have information in that regards.....it is a long shot and I think you should follow what Victoria is saying

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Why October 2001? I am kinda going off at a tangent so apologies to Victoria as I know the line you are taking is about the issue of PPI and proving misselling and mine is about the issue of statements.

Bazza, no harm in asking the question to NatWest but are they saying that they can only provide statements from October 2001 because their systems migrated over to the RBS Group systems then? If the answer is yes, then point out that NatWest Bank systems did have an archived system which included products taken out which might or might not have information in that regards.....it is a long shot and I think you should follow what Victoria is saying

Thanks Leclerc,

And apologies for any confusion. I was referring to their mention that the account opened in 1990 and PPI was added in February 1999. I believe that they are confusing a different card account but hopefully all will be clarified by monday from SAR department.

I will see what they say first then mention what you commented about the archived system. I already had statements from May 1999 and was hoping for anything prior to that but they only sent details from October 2001.

I will stick to what Victoria is saying as you can quite easily get detached from the prime issue.

:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Victoria27]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Dear Leclerc, your advices are always most helpful
I learn so much from your fabulous posts.
Thank you.

It might be very useful for Bazza and it is definitely worth to investigate.

I just try to put together a reasonable proof of mis-sale by showing that it is highly unlikely that Bazza would have applied for PPI.

Bazza, in most of those documents, application forms etc., as you mentioned, PPI is "strongly recommended", that is true.
Yet they they "no advice was given, no recommendation was made".
Such a nonsense.
They still argue that it is non advised sale.
I had such an argument with Santander about that very point.
However it might not be a strong enough argument on its own.
It is certainly an issue, but a more general issue. The fact that most of those documents had a paragraph, in fact, recommending PPI, should be addressed at some stage. It is not correct, strictly speaking, to say, that advise was not given.
That is something to bring to the attention of the FCA, may be, to Which Legal etc.

Meanwhile we still have to prepare your individual case, based on your individual situation.
I believe you have a strong case, based on your particular circumstances.
It seems obvious, that you did not have any reason to take PPI, because of your personal situation.
It is not a common sense to buy an additional expensive financial product, which one does not need.
There is unclear situation with almost 9 years between your getting card and PPI being attached to your account. That situation with the time discrepancy makes it very doubtful to suggest that you yourself applied for PPI.
If you asked for that insurance from the beginning, it should not have taken 9 years to add PPI.
If you did not apply for PPI from the start, it shows that you did NOT intend to take it in the first place and it does not sound believable to suggest that you, for no obvious reason, suddenly decided to ask for PPI 9 years later, considering you circumstances did NOT change.
Any common sense tells that you most likely never applied for it.
They do not have any proof that you did, they refer to some telephone conversation which you do not remember, which they did not register even in any form of a footprint.
They cannot use some unclear non existing telephone conversation as the basis of their decision, based on some assumption. It would be wrong.
Their side of the story does not make any sense while yours makes a perfect sense.
You did NOT have any reason to get PPI, while they had all the reasons to sell it to you.

Those are my preliminary thoughts about your case.

I would also add the references to the relevant FCA guidelines to demonstrate that most likely during the sale they (business) were in breach of the FCA guidelines, which makes sale flawed, which makes it mis-sale.
Also they (the complaint department) were in breach of the FCA rules and regulations while investigating your complaint. Instead they sent you a generic rejection letter.

Let's wait for further information on Monday.
Meanwhile, please see if some of my points work for you.

May be some of our great experts here on LB will also have some advice for you.

At least we'll give it our best shot.
Fingers crossed

V

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Dear Leclerc, your advices are always most helpful
I learn so much from your fabulous posts.
Thank you.

It might be very useful for Bazza and it is definitely worth to investigate.

I just try to put together a reasonable proof of mis-sale by showing that it is highly unlikely that Bazza would have applied for PPI.

Bazza, in most of those documents, application forms etc., as you mentioned, PPI is "strongly recommended", that is true.
Yet they they "no advice was given, no recommendation was made".
Such a nonsense.
They still argue that it is non advised sale.
I had such an argument with Santander about that very point.
However it might not be a strong enough argument on its own.
It is certainly an issue, but a more general issue. The fact that most of those documents had a paragraph, in fact, recommending PPI, should be addressed at some stage. It is not correct, strictly speaking, to say, that advise was not given.
That is something to bring to the attention of the FCA, may be, to Which Legal etc.

Meanwhile we still have to prepare your individual case, based on your individual situation.
I believe you have a strong case, based on your particular circumstances.
It seems obvious, that you did not have any reason to take PPI, because of your personal situation.
It is not a common sense to buy an additional expensive financial product, which one does not need.
There is unclear situation with almost 9 years between your getting card and PPI being attached to your account. That situation with the time discrepancy makes it very doubtful to suggest that you yourself applied for PPI.
If you asked for that insurance from the beginning, it should not have taken 9 years to add PPI.
If you did not apply for PPI from the start, it shows that you did NOT intend to take it in the first place and it does not sound believable to suggest that you, for no obvious reason, suddenly decided to ask for PPI 9 years later, considering you circumstances did NOT change.
Any common sense tells that you most likely never applied for it.
They do not have any proof that you did, they refer to some telephone conversation which you do not remember, which they did not register even in any form of a footprint.
They cannot use some unclear non existing telephone conversation as the basis of their decision, based on some assumption. It would be wrong.
Their side of the story does not make any sense while yours makes a perfect sense.
You did NOT have any reason to get PPI, while they had all the reasons to sell it to you.

Those are my preliminary thoughts about your case.

I would also add the references to the relevant FCA guidelines to demonstrate that most likely during the sale they (business) were in breach of the FCA guidelines, which makes sale flawed, which makes it mis-sale.
Also they (the complaint department) were in breach of the FCA rules and regulations while investigating your complaint. Instead they sent you a generic rejection letter.

Let's wait for further information on Monday.
Meanwhile, please see if some of my points work for you.

May be some of our great experts here on LB will also have some advice for you.

At least we'll give it our best shot.
Fingers crossed

V

Victoria,

Thank-you so much for your kind response and I totally agree with your preliminary thoughts and points. As far as I'm concerned they did not provide any concise evidence to respond to my complaint apart from the standard rejection wording, as very similar to a previous one I had in which I eventually won.

I will await more clarification from the SAR dept on Monday but I will be calling them anyway as I have a direct number for the person dealing with it. Also as previously mentioned I have put all in writing to them just as a back-up as to what is required and as to why details of the telephone conversation was not previously provided.

I appreciate yours and others input and expertise as always and will post up further once a response is received.

Bazza

[Victoria27]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Good. Please let us know how it goes on Monday.
If you won other cases, it is also a good news. Though circumstances of different sales are unique, however, one fact is obvious, PPI was not needed in your case.
Fingers crossed.
V

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Good. Please let us know how it goes on Monday.
If you won other cases, it is also a good news. Though circumstances of different sales are unique, however, one fact is obvious, PPI was not needed in your case.
Fingers crossed.
V

Just a quick up-date, eventually spoke to SAR dept today.

Further SAR details being couriered tomorrow but telephone conversation in February 1999 not available apart from some notes in which hopefully will be submitted with package.

I have now located rest of statements from day one of opening of account and have tied in with previous two Visa cards, the first opened in July 1990. It seems that when I up-graded to an Advantage Gold Bank account I was promised a new Gold Credit Card account at a lower rate, and the previous balance was transferred to a dual card account but PPI was already added in 1990 and not 1999 as they stated.

I found an old credit card agreement for the Visa card in 1990 and the insurance application form is still intact and was never submitted ?

Now maybe a silly question but do I treat the other two closed accounts (1990 - 1999) as two other separate PPI claims ?

[Victoria27]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Bazza, it does not look to me like they have a case.
I do not see any evidence that you ever applied for PPI.
In your reply to them it is good to make a point that they were in breach of the FCA guidelines, attaching PPI without your consent and also in breach of the guidelines while investigating your complaint.
I'll put together a few points for you, which, I think, might be good to mention in your reply.

V

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Bazza, it does not look to me like they have a case.
I do not see any evidence that you ever applied for PPI.
In your reply to them it is good to make a point that they were in breach of the FCA guidelines, attaching PPI without your consent and also in breach of the guidelines while investigating your complaint.
I'll put together a few points for you, which, I think, might be good to mention in your reply.

V

Victoria,

Thank-you so much for being so helpful as always.

That would be great and much appreciated.

On another note I have located another old Natwest Access account from 1988 and was closed and paid up in 2004. I have probably about 95% of statements in which I have the opening statement with ppi added.

My quick question is that on checking the Natwest Access user guide which I still had amongst the paperwork, it clearly advises that 'the premium is charged automatically to your card account' so therefore is this another case of miss-selling ?

It even goes on to say that if policy details required please send attached enquiry form ? So they have added insurance in which I knew nothing about, or what was covered etc. Do you think they will just say it was non-advised and for me to address ?

Cheers

Bazza

[Victoria27]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Dear Bazza,

Sorry for my late reply.
My virus caused dizziness and it was difficult to write.

Here are some thoughts about your possible reply.

Please do correct my English, which is far from perfect, being my second language.

At least it will give you some general ideas.

***

Dear Sir/Madam,


Ref:

I refer to your letter of ..... rejecting my claim for a refund of Payment Protection Insurance plus associated interest.

I consider your rejection to be both wrong and in breach of the FCA guidelines as to the assessment and redress of Payment Protection Insurance Complaints.

For your guidance I shall refer you to the relevant sections of the FCA Handbook and I am going to point out the various sections you are IN BREACH OF.


1. Firstly you based your investigation on the following items:
Certificate of Insurance
Credit Card statements

IN NO WAY it proves that I applied for PPI policy.

Also you refer to
Cancellation rights

I believe, you refer to the fact that I had a chance to cancel the policy and I did not do that.

This is IN BREACH of the FCA Handbook, App. 3 Handling Payment Protection Complaints, The Approach to Considering Evidence,

App. 3.3.6 G: "The firm should not reject a complaint because the complainant failed to exercise the right to cancel the policy".

2. Secondly
You based your decision on the assumption what might have happened, instead of dealing with the facts of my particular complaint.

All the information about the policy should have been disclosed to me BEFORE the sale was completed, not after that, to enable me to make an INFORMED decision.

For non advised sale, according to the FCA guidelines, you are obliged to disclosed all the relevant information PRIOR the sale is concluded.

I refer again to the relevant documents, the FCA guidelines.

Appendix 3 Handling Payment Protection Insurance complaints

Determining the effect of a breach or failing

Where the firm determines that there was a breach or failing, the firm should consider whether the complainant would have bought the payment protection contract in the absence of that breach or failing.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the firm should presume that the complainant would not have bought the payment protection contract he bought if the sale was substantially flawed, for example where the firm:

(1) pressured the complainant into purchasing the payment protection contract; or


(2) did not disclose to the complainant, in good time before the sale was concluded, and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading, that the policy was optional; or


(3) made the sale without the complainant's explicit agreement to purchase the policy; or


(4) did not disclose to the complainant, in good time before the sale was concluded, and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading, the significant exclusions and limitations, i.e. those that would tend to affect the decisions of customers generally to buy the policy; or...


The available evidence suggests that I never applied for that insurance, but it was automatically attached to my account without my consent or knowledge.

You state that I applied for it and it was added in 1999, following some non existing telephone conversation, which, according to my recollection, never took place and you have no evidence of that conversation in your SAR, not even a footprint.
However, while my account was opened in 1990, the available statements show that PPI was added much earlier, long before 1999, which again show that it was added without my consent and knowledge.

You did not really investigated my case properly, but, instead sent me a standard generic rejection letter.

You do not really have any evidence related to that case.

So, in the lack of any real evidence, except the fact that I did not cancel this PPI, which cannot not be considered as an evidence anyway, according to the FCA guidelines, you decided, instead of dealing with my particular case - which is very clear and straight forward - to base your decision on the assumption how things should have been done at the time of this sale.
Let me remind you of the App. 3.3.9, 3.3.10, 3.3.11 and 3.312 G, which you are in breach of, by doing that.
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".

3. You consider that I might have been aware of the policy because it was shown on my statements.
Why would I think that it was an optional product and not another compulsory service charge?
There is nothing in the statements which implies that PPI was optional.

4. You assume that I was advised of the main features of the policy, relevant exclusions and limitations etc.

I am going to prove that your statement is wrong.


1) If it was as you stated and I was advised of the main product features, that surely means that according to the guidelines those main features were disclosed to me in good time before the sale was concluded, and in a way that was fair, clear and not misleading, (and of course those main features had to the fact that the insurance was optional) "i.e. those that would tend to affect the decisions ....to buy the policy" (FCA, App. 3.6.2.E, "Determining the effect of a breach or failing").

2) Let me remind you, that all those feature had to be disclosed to me whether it was advised or NON ADVISED sale to enable me to make an "informed choice".

You can appreciate that it makes it impossible and absurd to suggest that after such a disclosure I would have made an "informed decision" to buy the product which would have been useless and not necessary for me.

My personal circumstances clearly show that in no way I needed that additional expensive financial product, considering that.... [your personal circumstances! other means to repay, other insurances, savings etc.]

This fact without any shadow of doubt proves that in my case PPI was mis-sold.

I am going to refer you to the FCA Handbook App.3/6 E, DISP 3.6.1 and 3.6.2, "Determining the effect of a breach or failing", which covers all those issues.

5. In your letter of ..... you failed to prove that the policy was fair and reasonable and that I was treated fairly when I was sold this insurance.
Your letter is written in breach of the FCA guidelines.
1.You based your rejection on the fact that I did not exercise my right to cancel this policy which is in the breach of the FCA guidelines.
2. You based your rejection on the assumption how the company should have acted, but not on the circumstances of my particular case, which is in the breach FCA guidelines.

My statements indicate that PPI was added from...

You claim it was added in 1999 after some strange "request" from me over the telephone, while you do not have any real proof of that request, no reference to the content of that conversation in the SAR. Such a "request" from me does not make any sense.
Of course, such a "request" from me could not exist, because my personal circumstances did not change. I did not request PPI from the beginning, though it shows in my statements! Why would I decide to apply for it 9 years later, when nothing changed in my financial situation.
It does not sound believable at all.

It is clear that no real investigation of my case took place, but, instead you sent me a generic rejection letter.

Looking at different forums I noticed that you sent similar letters, just inserting different names to other complainants, It is also in the breach of the FCA regulations and relevant organisations have to be made aware of that shameful practice.
You sent me a reply, but not an answer, addressing my personal issues.

According to the FCA regulations, you were supposed to take my personal circumstances at the time of sale into consideration, which clearly, you did not do.

Can you give me at least one reasonable explanation why would I agree to take this cover, which I knew I did not need at all?

Any court of law would believe what is reasonable.

What in your opinion was reasonable in my "informed decision" to take this PPI, considering that.....

On the other hand, your company had all the reason to sell it to me.

Why would you believe that they did everything correct and gave me all the necessary information?

It is not natural to buy something we do not need. Unless we are led to believe it is necessary or we are not aware that we bought it.

It looks like your company is not aware of the situation with mis-sold PPIs and act like that never happened.

It looks like your complaint department is not aware of the FCA regulations or, which is even worse, you are thinking we are not aware of it.

Let me assure you, that I will not give up and will escalate my case and will make it public and will go as far as necessary to put it right.
I will contact my MP, press and also will inform the FCA about your company failing your fiduciary duties.

Please do not send me any more template letters.
I shall expect you to look in my case properly and I am giving you further 2 weeks to reconsider prior to me escalating my case.


Yours faithfully,
........


Victoria

[di30]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Fantastic Victoria!!!

I couldnt have said it better myself, you have covered absolutely everything, this should do the trick........ get better soon my lovely x x

[Victoria27]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Thank you, my darling Di.
I am so glad you like it.
I hope it will help Bazza
Vx

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Thank you, my darling Di.
I am so glad you like it.
I hope it will help Bazza
Vx

V that is absolutely brilliant and thank-you so much for your time.

I have put together a letter using your input and sent to Natwest PPI Complaints this morning via recorded delivery.

I forgot to mention that I again spoke to the SAR department on Friday regarding the telephone call details as this will be my fourth request and yet no transcript or dialogue forthcoming. I even asked for a brief description of what was said but she couldn't tell me ?

Oh well lets see what response I get after they receive my further letter.

Cheers

Bazza

[Victoria27]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Fingers crossed.

[Bazza]

Re: Natwest Gold Visa & Mastercard PPI Complaint

Fingers crossed.

Hi V,

Well I today received another rejection response from Natwest / RBS totally ignoring my previous response.

They claim that I had contradicted my reasons yet, they previously incorrectly assumed and stated that the insurance was added during a telephone call that I have yet to receive any evidence of ???

It then transpires that, the original card was taken out in 1990 when it was automatically added (in which they have no details of) and not in 1999 in which they previously stated ??? I am a bit frustrated that they have completely avoided my answers to their previous letter and evidence to my original complaint.

I have attached a copy of their response letter, from a completely different person may I add.

Shall I respond again, highlighting their contradictory comments and this time copy in the CEO (if someone can kindly provide an e-mail address) before going to FOS ?

Thanks again for any further comments.

:tinysmile_cry_t: