Tweet
Re: Agency Relationship PPI Complaints Help
Hi Bazza,
from on what I can see, in the evidence that you have attached, you have enough to present a good enough case.
Here is a suggestion, that you are completely welcome to ignore!!!!!!! When I presented my case to the FOS, I bought one of those ring binders that the youngsters use plus some plastic pocket folders. My mail letter detailed attachments, a , b, c, etc. I put into the prepared case everything I could find in support of my case.
so it reads very clearly and can be cross referenced.
take each point of the FOS letter, give your answer and then the evidence to back up what you have said.
start with Dial4loans, you have proof of the company addresses, you are absolutely right, business would not be accepted from one company to another without an agreement. So, as the lawyers say" take the presumptive close" , "Welcome loans would not have accepted business in the absence of an agency agreement......" Likewise take the same route with the placing of loan business, " as Dial4loans were part of the Welcome/Cattles Companies it is reasonable to suggest that all of their loan business was placed through Welcome, to ensure that all income stayed within the Group", as proven by the payment statement, Appendix B. (Let the other side disprove these statements.
) For this Appendix a) attach all the entries that Katie has found for you. Attach the statement of payment that shows what Welcome paid to Dial 4 loans ( Appendix B)
if you look at the extract from the ppi policy, 1st paragraph, it states that it is between Cattles and Norwich Union and refers to a definition of the"lender", who we know is Welcome. Appendix c is the extract from the ppi policy and Appendix d is the information from the internet on the companies. You have a key Facts Document which I think shows Welcome as the Lender. Again this ties up with the PPI policy document. Etc, etc, this would be Appendix e. Use the same information as many times as you need to, so that you build a comprehensive case.
With regards to Norwich Union, they have been regulated prior to 2005.
Make sure you cover every single point that the FOS have raised. Also, I believe you can Make a strong case that it was money for the group in the form of ppi income, loan interest and loan introduction fees, I e a commercial relationship, that drove the whole transaction. Argue that Dial4loans and Welcome were accepting your business for the benefit of their group, which, as they insisted on ppi
being taken, how could that have been in your best interests?
Was this loan in joint names or a single name, should any company have been speaking to your OH? I mean no harm in that, I'm just thinking about correct procedures here?
Bazza, I hope this helps. I believe that you are well capable of a comprehensive reply but in some cases we get so overwhelmed that we don't know where to start. That is what happened me with a Capital One FOS case and everyone at LB helped me!
I would also also enclose the evidence from other cases. Take out any identification and print out the evidence. If the FOS have found a link in one case, then surely that applies across the board?
you will be surprised how much of a case you have when you start putting all the evidence in. I read some time ago on another forum, of a gentleman preparing a case for FOS which stretched to 300 pages!!!!!!!! (By coincidence that was for Capital One as well)
Finally, your case is with an adjudicator, you can insist that it goes before an adjudicator.
good luck with your letter, hopefully this will help,
very best regards,
:beagle: Xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Bazza,
from on what I can see, in the evidence that you have attached, you have enough to present a good enough case.
Here is a suggestion, that you are completely welcome to ignore!!!!!!! When I presented my case to the FOS, I bought one of those ring binders that the youngsters use plus some plastic pocket folders. My mail letter detailed attachments, a , b, c, etc. I put into the prepared case everything I could find in support of my case.
so it reads very clearly and can be cross referenced.
take each point of the FOS letter, give your answer and then the evidence to back up what you have said.
start with Dial4loans, you have proof of the company addresses, you are absolutely right, business would not be accepted from one company to another without an agreement. So, as the lawyers say" take the presumptive close" , "Welcome loans would not have accepted business in the absence of an agency agreement......" Likewise take the same route with the placing of loan business, " as Dial4loans were part of the Welcome/Cattles Companies it is reasonable to suggest that all of their loan business was placed through Welcome, to ensure that all income stayed within the Group", as proven by the payment statement, Appendix B. (Let the other side disprove these statements.
) For this Appendix a) attach all the entries that Katie has found for you. Attach the statement of payment that shows what Welcome paid to Dial 4 loans ( Appendix B)
if you look at the extract from the ppi policy, 1st paragraph, it states that it is between Cattles and Norwich Union and refers to a definition of the"lender", who we know is Welcome. Appendix c is the extract from the ppi policy and Appendix d is the information from the internet on the companies. You have a key Facts Document which I think shows Welcome as the Lender. Again this ties up with the PPI policy document. Etc, etc, this would be Appendix e. Use the same information as many times as you need to, so that you build a comprehensive case.
With regards to Norwich Union, they have been regulated prior to 2005.
Make sure you cover every single point that the FOS have raised. Also, I believe you can Make a strong case that it was money for the group in the form of ppi income, loan interest and loan introduction fees, I e a commercial relationship, that drove the whole transaction. Argue that Dial4loans and Welcome were accepting your business for the benefit of their group, which, as they insisted on ppi
being taken, how could that have been in your best interests?
Was this loan in joint names or a single name, should any company have been speaking to your OH? I mean no harm in that, I'm just thinking about correct procedures here?
Bazza, I hope this helps. I believe that you are well capable of a comprehensive reply but in some cases we get so overwhelmed that we don't know where to start. That is what happened me with a Capital One FOS case and everyone at LB helped me!
I would also also enclose the evidence from other cases. Take out any identification and print out the evidence. If the FOS have found a link in one case, then surely that applies across the board?
you will be surprised how much of a case you have when you start putting all the evidence in. I read some time ago on another forum, of a gentleman preparing a case for FOS which stretched to 300 pages!!!!!!!! (By coincidence that was for Capital One as well)
Finally, your case is with an adjudicator, you can insist that it goes before an adjudicator.
good luck with your letter, hopefully this will help,
very best regards,
:beagle: Xxxxxxxxxxx
Comment