Tweet
Hello to everyone,
Could I ask a question or two;
Firstly. I am right in saying that a credit card provider who starts to apply a PPI charge to a card and that card stays in a debt situation and so the PPI is applied month on month. When the PPI is successfully challenged for miss-selling is the card provider supposed to return you to the financial position that you would have been in if no PPI have been charged at all and so you would of had the use of that money which was effectively denied to you?
If this is the case then is the following true?
For each occurrence of a PPI charge in a month.
1. Refund of premium
2. Refund of the interest charged on the premium at the prevailing Apr standard rate/purchase rate, I am presuming here that the card continues to be in debt despite any re calculating of the statements.
3. THEN for each month the provider will also provide the equivalent proportion of the 8% simple interest (one 12th of the 8% per month but not compounded within the year) to make amends for you not having this money and using it in whatever way that you would have seen fit, which could include investing it.
Would 2-3 be true for each month going forward for each charge for PPI until PPI is no longer charged? and then
Am I correct in saying that if I was in a debt situation with this credit card for a long time (say 5 years for arguments sake) after the provider stopped (was stopped) charging PPI then I have still been charged for each occurrence of PPI at the standard Apr every month until the account was paid off or in credit and only then would all the PPI charges and the Apr interest only attract the simple interest at 8% per year until account closed or PPI reclaim date.
I can see why the 8% simple interest would apply if you were in credit but surely it should still apply if you are not, Y/N? as this is to make amends for you not having the use of the money, Y/N? and so would be applied pro rata to the difference between the interest and PPI you were charged and the true charges as they would have been if no PPI or the interest on the PPI had been charged, or any part of a year of course.
Also what if anything would they do with any other charges applied in the PPI charge period, I think if they recalculate from a historic point in time at the start of the charging of PPI Then over-limit charges would be returned, if the recalculation shows you would not have gone over-limit, and treated as in 1-3 above but would they look at late payment fees also or not? It is entirely possible that the late payment fees would never have occurred if the debt burden had not been worsened with PPI charges and the compound effect of interest on them which is further compounded in month 2 with another PPI charge with interest again on the first PPI charge and now on the second etc etc.
Sorry if this is not absolutely clear, please feel free to ask questions to help me make it clearer.
Any and all help will be gratefully received.
Could I ask a question or two;
Firstly. I am right in saying that a credit card provider who starts to apply a PPI charge to a card and that card stays in a debt situation and so the PPI is applied month on month. When the PPI is successfully challenged for miss-selling is the card provider supposed to return you to the financial position that you would have been in if no PPI have been charged at all and so you would of had the use of that money which was effectively denied to you?
If this is the case then is the following true?
For each occurrence of a PPI charge in a month.
1. Refund of premium
2. Refund of the interest charged on the premium at the prevailing Apr standard rate/purchase rate, I am presuming here that the card continues to be in debt despite any re calculating of the statements.
3. THEN for each month the provider will also provide the equivalent proportion of the 8% simple interest (one 12th of the 8% per month but not compounded within the year) to make amends for you not having this money and using it in whatever way that you would have seen fit, which could include investing it.
Would 2-3 be true for each month going forward for each charge for PPI until PPI is no longer charged? and then
Am I correct in saying that if I was in a debt situation with this credit card for a long time (say 5 years for arguments sake) after the provider stopped (was stopped) charging PPI then I have still been charged for each occurrence of PPI at the standard Apr every month until the account was paid off or in credit and only then would all the PPI charges and the Apr interest only attract the simple interest at 8% per year until account closed or PPI reclaim date.
I can see why the 8% simple interest would apply if you were in credit but surely it should still apply if you are not, Y/N? as this is to make amends for you not having the use of the money, Y/N? and so would be applied pro rata to the difference between the interest and PPI you were charged and the true charges as they would have been if no PPI or the interest on the PPI had been charged, or any part of a year of course.
Also what if anything would they do with any other charges applied in the PPI charge period, I think if they recalculate from a historic point in time at the start of the charging of PPI Then over-limit charges would be returned, if the recalculation shows you would not have gone over-limit, and treated as in 1-3 above but would they look at late payment fees also or not? It is entirely possible that the late payment fees would never have occurred if the debt burden had not been worsened with PPI charges and the compound effect of interest on them which is further compounded in month 2 with another PPI charge with interest again on the first PPI charge and now on the second etc etc.
Sorry if this is not absolutely clear, please feel free to ask questions to help me make it clearer.
Any and all help will be gratefully received.
