PPI Claim not upheld by Financial Ombudsman as submitted after 6 Weeks

[lailadebs]

Dear Legal Beagles team.

I have been claiming a PPI refund from LLoyds since 2013. My claim was rejected twice by Lloyds. I referred my case to the Financial Ombudsman who after a while concluded they were unable to uphold my claim as the bank discovered that my referral to the ombudsman fell outside the 6 months period. I appealed to the Ombudsman again and asked they reviewed the fact that just because I stupidly did not pay attention to the cut off time of 6 months, thinking that it would be 6 months from the final rejection by the business, and missed the deadline by 10 days, does not negate the fact that I was mis-sold the insurance. Today I received the final decision from the ombudsman of not upholding my claim and that my reasons for failing to keep within the deadline of 6 months is not a strong case.

Can you please advise me on what the next stept I should take.

Many thanks

[Tools]

Re: PPI Claim not upheld by Financial Ombudsman as submitted after 6 Weeks

On what grounds was it rejected by Lloyds? Unfortunately as you were outside the time limits with FOS they do stick to the rules.

On each occasion that you were rejected by Lloyds what reason did they give and why do you think in your opinion you have a valid claim for PPI refund

[lailadebs]

Re: PPI Claim not upheld by Financial Ombudsman as submitted after 6 Weeks

Thank you for your prompt reply. Yes, sadly the FOS stated their final decision of closing the case and for not taking it further.

My initial claim for being mis-sold the PPI with Lloyd was on the grounds that there was never any sales knowledge or any documentation relating to PPI policy cover, was not advised on the main features, exclusions or limitations of the cover, I was not asked if I had existing means of protecting the loan, and I was not asked if the PPI policy was suitable for me as a self employed business owner. Their reply rejection was that at the point of sale I did not have appropriate means by which I could protect the payments to the credit card, I was not suffering from any pre existing medical conditions that would affect the full use of the PPI policy, that they could not see any evidence of any event that would have affected the suitability of the policy in the foreseeable future, the information considered demonstrates the level of cover provided was appropriate and the policy recommended was designed specifically for the credit agreement, and finally that although I would have been affected to some extent by the limitation of the PPI policy however, the extent of the effect meant there was no impact on the suitability of the policy.

I replied and requested a further assessment to the fact that there certainly was never any sales knowledge or any documentation relating to the PPI that was made clear, and that there was never an inquiry into my private means beyond my annual income at the time to determine whether the policy suited me as I am self employed business owner. Their second rejection for upholding my appeal claim was that there nothing to change their original decision and they still do not agree the PPI policy was mis-sold to me.

These rejections are very standard and typical of the same reasons I received from Opus and Halifax credit cards which both then upheld my claims when I referred the cases to the FOS.

[EXC]

Re: PPI Claim not upheld by Financial Ombudsman as submitted after 6 Weeks

Unfortunately their initial rejection would have been their final response for the purposes of triggering the 6 months from which you had to take the complaint to the FOS. That you subsequently appealed to the bank and to which they responded doesn't have any effect on it I'm afraid.

[lailadebs]

Re: PPI Claim not upheld by Financial Ombudsman as submitted after 6 Weeks

I understand. Is it worth going the legal way?

[EXC]

Re: PPI Claim not upheld by Financial Ombudsman as submitted after 6 Weeks

I understand. Is it worth going the legal way?

To be honest, no. The PPI complaints criteria and FOS have a far lower threshold for the mis-selling of PPI than the law does and very few PPI cases have been won it court for that reason.

I know it's frustrating but I'd forget about it and move on.