***RBS PPI Claim Long fight but, WON***

[alanalana]

Hello hhnf,

Hello AA,

Have you been out shopping and spending all that lovely dosh Car packed up so need another second hand one. Working on that before I have to be back to work

Can you let me have the dept and the address at rbs, that you have been sending your ppi reclaim letters too. (My letters and correspondence have all been through FOS until the last couple of days when I got the payments and then I received confirmatory letters of what was being refunded. I am just about to start the process on behalf of a friend who has two loans with ppi on, that she did not even know what it was

Have done the Subject Access Request and yes you guess, rather economic with the information given and no response to her last non-compliance letter

They have eventually cancelled the ppi on this current loan, so we know the rebate on this one, but not the first loan rebate Keep at them and remember the Information Commissioners Office route if you get a hard time. RBS are still looking at the element of my complaint in another department. I suppose it keeps them in a job

Here is the address of the RBS Office that I have had confirmation from over the last 4 or 5 days.

PPI Customer Concerns Team
Regulatory Risk
5th Floor
1 Hardman Boulevard
Manchester
M3 3AQ

Tel: 0161 755 6890
Free Phone 0800 015 0319

Open 8.00am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday.

Good Luck and a Very Happy New Year to you

aa

There will be no doubt a few case officers dealing with the complaint from the FOS, Information Commissioners Office and the Courts so I cannot give a specific name

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[traceyb918]

Well done aa, Happy New Year
Tracey

[alanalana]

Well done aa, Happy New Year
Tracey

And a Happy New Year to you Tracey

aa

[alanalana]

Hello all,

just a post to let you all know that i have two partial successes on PPI but I intend to take my fight further with another complaint to the FOS and OFT. Details to folllow after a rest as it has taken me 12 months to get this far. My claim will be small but I intend to go all the way. watch this space I still have one outstanding complaint with the FOS and One with the Information Commissioners Office.

aa

Repayments on mis-sold PPI so far over £8K and still a way to go

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[alanalana]

Hello all,

just a quick update.

Letter received today from the FOS, my first complaint has not been upheld by the adjudicator as it was about the failure of RBS to provide data under my Subject Access Request namely they took months not weeks and I am still waiting, plus they gave false information and inaccurate information as well as no informatino. They suggest the way forward is the Information Commissioners Office as it is a data protection act issue. The complaint is already lodged with the Information Commissioners Office and acknowledged and a copy of their response is in an earlier post with photobucket on this thread.

They still have to give a final response to me once the RBS respond to them and the RBS are still investigating the issue having received the Information Commissioners Office letter.

I will post a success as and when I get the Information Commissioners Office response after the RBS have answered the Information Commissioners Office letter.

Over 12 months and counting to final resolution

aa

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[alanalana]

Hello all,

just a quick update.

Letter received today from the FOS, my first complaint has not been upheld by the adjudicator as it was about the failure of RBS to provide data under my Subject Access Request namely they took months not weeks and I am still waiting, plus they gave false information and inaccurate information as well as no information. They suggest the way forward is the Information Commissioners Office as it is a data protection act issue. The complaint is already lodged with the Information Commissioners Office and acknowledged and a copy of their response is in an earlier post with photobucket on this thread.

They still have to give a final response to me once the RBS respond to them and the RBS are still investigating the issue having received the Information Commissioners Office letter.

I will post a success as and when I get the Information Commissioners Office response after the RBS have answered the Information Commissioners Office letter.

Over 12 months and counting to final resolution

aa

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[alanalana]

Hello to all PPI reclaimers,

I have been fighting since 7 January 2008 on PPI issues on 7 loans. If you have seen my very long thread you will see it has been a long and arduous fight to get MY money back.

The result although not yet fully resolved is OK. I have one outstanding issue with the Information Commissioners Office on the RBS not upholding the Requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998 (All the info is in my thread....to be found here. The Information Commissioners Office it appears have upheld my complaint on one issue with regard to the Data Protection Act, and have asked the RBS some questions. The photobucket entries in my later posts on the following thread show the letter from the Information Commissioners Office.

alanalana PPI claim against RBS (looking for some help) please

I had an issue over 4 loans with the Direct Line Financial Services which were legally transferred to the Royal Bank of Scotland (again see my thread)

I also had three loans with the RBS. All 7 loans had PPI attached as single premium and added to the total cost of the loan. I claimed on Pre existing medical conditions as I am an Ex serviceman with a 40% disablement pension the both Direct Line and RBS were aware of as I have documentary evidence in both cases. When the Loans were offered there were no requests made in regard to pre existing medical conditions within any of their documents applicable to the applications when the loans were offered. In fact the needs and wants questionnaire in my posession show not a single question on pre existing medical conditions even though every month a deposit was made into my current account from the paymaster general showing WP (war pension).

Any way the FOS adjudicators have received offers from RBS on all seven loan accounts with PPI added and I have received settlement in excess of £10k. The problem here is it is a hollow victory as I with millions of other taxpayers actually now legally own 70% of RBS so I am in effect paying myself the refund even though the likes of sir f goowin former ceo of RBS have scooted with millions made from mis-selling PPI. Any chance of an apology highly unlikely

I now understand that 4 bankers have been hauled before the House of Commons Select Committee and been given a grilling three of them used the word "Sorry" but sir fred would only use the word apologise. ( is this the same as sorry or a way out of using sorry?)

Yes I got my money back but sadly from myself and my Children and maybe Grandchildren in the future.

I Therefore do not wish sir f a long and happy retirement. It was quite a pleasure to see a semi squirm in front of the Committee and yes I did smile!!!

Miffed yes but with a few quid in the bank but not as much as sir f.

aa

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[alanalana]

Hello all,

I thought it was all settled with RBS on my previously named thread
alanalana against RBS some help required please.

Then today I receive a special paid envelope from RBS (it will have cost them at least £6.40 so that is good news sort of as I am part owner of the RBS group now)

The Information Commissioners complaint I submitted must have been answered by RBS as per previous posts on my thread (Photobucket copies in earlier post) I suddenly have a mound of information requested in my Subject Access Request 7 January 2008 suddenly appears today, so more sifting to be done. Just in case they missed the odd loan with PPI attached I will check it carefully and maybe I can start a new thread

I have copies of printouts and computer details not previously seen plus much much more.

Sadly the details of the pension package for Good old Fred is not included.

I will keep you posted on any findings.

aa

	Subject Access Request A Subject Access Request is a demand which you can make to any organisation to disclose any personal information which they hold on you. The right to disclosure of data is provided by the Data Protection Act. There is no time limit. The organisation is obliged to reveal everything they have about you - which you ask for - as far back as you ask for. There are very few exceptions. It does not matter whether the data is held on microfiche, in an archive, on tape, in a cardex system, in sound recordings or in screen notes. Some companies are saying that they do not have to disclose where it would be difficult to do so - "disproportionate effort". This is untrue. Disproportionate effort refers to something else under the Act. If you are seeking bank charges information then you should ask for "all data held on you" and you should make it clear that you want everything as far back as it goes. Do not be put off by excuses. Do not accept being fobbed off. It is not in your bank's interest to make full disclosure to you. This means that it is in your interests to get it. If you have not started gathering your bank charges information yet, then you should start now. There will soon be a big rush once the OFT test case has been settled. Get all of your bank account informtion as far back as possible. At least as far back as 1995. If your bank says that they don't keep data as far back as this, don't accept it. Be persistent. They've got what you need in some form or other.

[yourbank]

I can say this now, I can really really say this without any form of bias whatsoever. CONGRATULATIONS!! Have you got any bank charges you could get em with

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

[alanalana]

Hello yourbank,

already recovered bank charges prior to PPI.

Not totally happy, as with the collapse of RBS and Taxpayers takeover I am essentially paying myself the PPI, While Fred Goodwin refuses to pay back any of his pension of £16m and I refuse to call him sir. So in effect I get £10k of my money back paid by me as a taxpayer, which was obtained under false pretences ie mis-selling of PPI over the last 11 years and he walks away with £16m for doing a good job for the shareholders who now must dearly hold him in high esteem I THINK NOT.

Big mistake on getting that guy to run RBS How many are out of jobs now while he creams in the pension. He is laughing all the way to the bank.

I will bet his bank will not be RBS but a bank somewhere else

aa

	Bank Charges You should have started your claim for your bank charges by now. Don't wait. You should send your bank a Subject Acess Request asking for all personal data they hold on you - not just statements. You should calculate all of your bank charges and related interest as far back as 1995. You should send your bank a demand for a refund giving them 7 days. You should commence your legal action adding 8% statutory interest. If you wait for the outcome of the test case, you may not be able to claim like this. you may not be able to claim interest. You may only be offered the difference between the charge and the OFT "fair charge". The repayment scheme will try to limit you to refinds from 2001 only. A repayment scheme will not deal with any bank charges related defaults on the credit register whereas in a court action you can ask for these to be removed and to be compensated for the damage caused to you and your family by them. You should also write to the bank and to the CRA and put all charges related credit entries in disupte and warn them that you will want them removed from the Register when the test case is over. Warn them also that you are likely to be seeking compensation for these wrongful data entries. Full and final settlement Have you previously accepted a partial repayment of your bank charges in full settlement? You will still be able to claim the rest of your money back after the Test case is decided. Get all your information back to 1995 and put in your claim now.

[yourbank]

You do know that I was fired from the bank, don't you?

[alanalana]

Hello yourbank,

No, I did not know that. Sorry that you lost out. I guess there are many more following in your footsteps now that the **** has hit the fan and fred will be covered by a large anti **** umbrella to allow him to keep every body elses money

Does he have a RBS account? anyone know the answer?

aa

[yourbank]

I got sacked for gross misconduct. Even spoke to the press
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...d-1622476.html

I can't answer your question but all RBS Group employees should have a Group bank account as part of their terms of employment.

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

Hi AA. Well done for winning your PPI claims, evevn though you are as you said paying yourself it is still one up on the Banks. So well done.

Yourbank. Just read your link. Well done for speaking out. Sorry you had to loose your job. They are on my next hit list as i one of those they made life very difficult for (AND STILL ARE TRYING). That is for anouther thread anouther time though. WELL DONE it is very much appreciated

olives xxx

[alanalana]

Thank you Olives family,

in my case it looks like RBS, the opposition is down the proverbial Pan and my very good friend the late ceo of RBS, fred gets away with it all especially the massive pension, which he now refuses to pay back

There are names for people like him in this world. I cannot say more as he has more money than me and therefore more access to legal assistance than me. He is best forgotten as a money winner but a bad loser.

aa

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

Alana can I ask what letter did you send to Direct Line for the multiple loans???. I have the same thing with HBOS. We had a loan then refinanced it to the current loan. I no longer have account numbers though for the first loan.

olives xx

[alanalana]

Hello Olives family,

Alana can I ask what letter did you send to Direct Line for the multiple loans???. I have the same thing with HBOS. We had a loan then refinanced it to the current loan. I no longer have account numbers though for the first loan.

olives xx

This is a letter I sent to RBS re multiple loans with PPI attached. I did something similar with Direct Line Financial Services so the pattern would be the same. Please see this and use to your advantage if you can use and amend and also check out more posts in my thread......

The Royal Bank of Scotland
xxx
Dear xx xxxxxxxxxx,
Re: Loan accounts. Reference numbers:
xxx Account No xxx
xxx Account No xxx
xxx Account No xxx
References:
A. My Subject Access Request (S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)) dated 7 January 2008.
B. Your xxx (Acknowledgement).
C. My xxx (Supply of additional information).
D. Your xxx(Supply of copies of statements).
E. Your xxx (Forwarded information to branch).
F. Your xxx (Duplicate statements for account xxx).
G. Your xxx (Duplicate statements for account xxx and request for more information).
H. xxx (Letter stating full disclosure as requested in Reference A had not been received and concern over missing data).
I. Duplicate statements for account xxxx no letter attached.
J. Your xxx requesting dates, times, names and departments re telephone conversations.
K. My xxx requesting full details as required by my reference A including all records of all telephone conversations.
L. My xxx forwarding my xxx with attachments.
M. My xxx CCA request for loans.
N. Your letter with reference Your xxx enclosing information with regard to account xxx.
O. My xxx requesting further data.
P. Your letter with ref Your xxx stating you do not have the paperwork on two previous loans.
Q. My xxx my response to Reference P.

I write in regard to the above References A - Q. Sadly, The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) have so far failed to comply fully with my DSAR in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 (despite the correct procedures being followed and the correct fees being submitted) for the provision of all data applicable to myself and the three loan accounts. I have submitted a separate letter on this subject to the Data Protection Officer and, indeed, have lodged a formal complaint with the Information Commissioners Office. You have forwarded copies of the three Loan account statements, my current account statement and information as requested in Reference M.

In each case PPI policies were attached to the above loans obtained from you on 8 March 2004, 20 May 2005 and 21 August 2006.

I am now convinced that I was mis-sold these PPI policies for the following 7 reasons:

1. Responsibilities When Underwriting a Policy of Insurance: On each occasion, when the details of a loan were discussed Your sales advisors failed to check my personal circumstances at the time of the sale, which they are under obligation to do when underwriting a Policy of Insurance. If they had done so, they would have realised that the PPI policies were useless to me. At no time was any attempt made to ascertain if the product provided was fit for purpose, suitable for my needs or if indeed it was required at all.

2. Alternative Insurance Cover: Your sales advisors in each case failed to ask me if I had any alternative arrangements for insurance cover. My employer has a generous illness package which would cover a period of sickness as follows: 6 months full pay followed by 6 months half pay. I would also be entitled to a generous redundancy package and a substantial payment would be made in the event of my death in service (more than suffice to clear the balance of the loan).


3.Failure to Supply Important Information with Regard to Significant Policy Exclusions: I was most definitely not informed that the PPI policies could contain certain exclusions which could affect me and my ability to claim on the policies if I should need to. Additionally I was never told that Pre Existing Medical Conditions could invalidate my policy and I was never asked if I had any Pre Existing Medical Conditions. Indeed your Loan Customer Duty of Care Checklist and the Loanguard Certificate of Insurance to which the Customer Duty of Care Checklist refers (forwarded under cover of Reference N) contain no reference to any Pre Existing Medical Conditions or includes any questions to me on the subject. I am in fact in receipt of a 40% War Disablement Pension from Her Majesty’s Government (HMG) since 1991. One element of this pension includes back injury which I now know is an exclusion in your PPI Policies. I also believe that I would also be excluded on at least one other existing condition.

4. Widespread PPI Mis-Selling: I cancelled the PPI policy on xxxAccountNo xxx on 7 Jan 2007 after becoming aware of the widespread mis-selling of PPI by some financial institutions, following recent media coverage and recent OFT and FSA investigations regarding the mis-selling of PPI. I believe this is borne out by Point 3 above. I am also aware that the question of PPI cover is the subject of an ongoing inquiry by the Competition Commissioner.

5. Wholly Inappropriate PPI Selling Bonuses: I understand that some employees are paid higher bonuses if they get prospective creditors to take out PPI with loans. How can the best interests of the customer possibly be met, if there is a clear conflict of interest between your responsibilities to me, and the drive of your employees to sell Payment Protection Insurance whether it is suitable or not in order to receive bonuses?

6. PPI Loan Interest payments miscalculated: Since I cancelled the policy, I have actually received a smaller reduction in the PPI loan interest payments than the figure stated on the agreement. The explanatory letter sent to me has, I believe, confirmed that I have paid for single premium PPI policies on each loan taken with your establishment.

7. True Nature of Single Premium PPI Not Explained: No explanation was forthcoming from any advisor on any occasion on the full extent of single premium PPI policies or the fact that they would offer little or no refund if the loan was settled early or if the insurance was cancelled. The statements you have forwarded on accounts xxx and xxx, show no element of any refund of PPI or PPI interest when the accounts were settled on refinancing. There was also no explanation that the cost of the PPI premium would be added to the total cost of credit and interest added for the full term of the agreement. I believe this practice is unlawful.

I now believe that the single premium PPI policies attached to the loan accounts were both extremely unfair and totally unreasonable and offered me very little, if any protection value whatsoever. I am therefore requesting a full refund of all costs including all single PPI premiums that have been paid, the interest added to these premiums and the payments, that I have paid to date.

Furthermore as I believe I have been unlawfully deprived of this money, I also expect the repayment of the interest at the Statutory Interest rate of 8% applicable to of each of the single premiums.

Details of the single premiums for each account with the interest payments made are as follows:

xxx Account No xxx
Insurance premium including interest on the premium = £6,109.32
Monthly interest payments made 8 April 2004 to 9 May 2005 £72.73 X 14 = £1,018.22
Sub Total £7127.54 Plus @ 8% Statutory Interest £570.20 =
Total sum £7,697.74

xxx Account No xxx
Insurance premium including interest on the premium = £7,534.90
Monthly interest payments made 20 June 2005 to 20 July 2006 £89.70 X 14 £1,255.80
Sub total £8,790.70 plus @ 8% Statutory Interest £703.25 =
Total sum £9,493.95

xxx Account No xxx
Insurance premium including interest on the premium = £8448.72 Less rebate on PPI premium £5,598.03 and rebate on PPI interest £1,552.78 (£7,150.81) = £1,297.91
Monthly interest payments made 20 September 2007 to 22 January 2007 £100.58 X 5 £502.90
Sub total £1,800.81 plus @ 8% Statutory Interest £144.06 =
Total sum £1,944.87

The total repayment figure I require is: £19,136.56

If I do not receive a favourable response to this letter, I will pursue my claim through the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and indeed the Courts if necessary.

In Reference P paragraph 2 you stated, “With regard to the two loans with DLFS this has been passed on to the relevant Department who will correspond directly with you“. I still await correspondence from that Department in relation to that information. Please expedite a reply from this Department at your earliest convenience.

Yours faithfully,

name

regards

aa

this is the Direct Line letter just found it....

The Royal Bank of Scotland
Retail Regulatory Risk
Business House B
P O Box 1000
Edinburgh
EH12 1HQ

Dear xx xxxxxx,


Re: Direct Line Loan accounts. Reference numbers:

Account No xxx DATE to DATE
Account No xxx DATE to DATE (Shown as DATE)
Account No xxx DATE to DATE
Account No xxx DATE to DATE

References:
A. My Subject Access Request (S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)) dated 7 January 2008.
B. Your xxx dated 22 January 2008 (Acknowledgement).
C. My xxx dated 24 January 2008 (Supply of additional information).
D. Your xxx dated 29 January 2008 (Supply of copies of statements).
E. Your xxx dated 31 January 2008 (Forwarded information to branch).
F. Your xxx dated 9 February 2008 (Duplicate statements for account xxx
G. Your xxx dated 13 February 2008 (Duplicate statements for account xxx and request for more information).
H. My xxx dated 16 February 2008 (Letter stating full disclosure as requested in Reference A had not been received and concern over missing data).
I. Duplicate statements for account xxx no letter attached.
J. Your xxx letter dated 25 March 2008 requesting dates, times, names and departments re telephone conversations.
K. My xxx dated 28 March 2008 requesting full details as required by my Reference A including all records of all telephone conversations.
L. My xxx dated 12 April 2008 forwarding my xxx dated 2 April 2008 with attachments.
M. My xxx dated 12 April 2008 CCA request for loans.
N. Your letter with reference Your ref xxx dated 17 April 2008 enclosing information with regard to account xxx.
O. My xxx dated 19 April 2008 requesting further data.
P. Your letter with ref Your xxx dated 30 April 2008 stating you do not have the paperwork on two previous loans.
Q. My xxx dated 9 May 2008 my response to Reference P.
R. Your xxx dated 30 May 2008 providing additional data and information on 4 DLFS Loan Accounts.

I write in regard to the above References A - R.

The documents received under cover of your Reference R show the following:

First. Each of the above accounts has had either a Payment Protection Plan or Loan Payment Protection, namely Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) policies applied to them as a single premium payment added to the total credit on the account. The above accounts were obtained from your Direct Line Department on 11 April 1997, 17 December 1998, 28 June 2002 and 15 March 2003.

Two of the accounts show detail of a rebate of part of the PPI when the account was either refinanced or settled, these are: xxx and xxx.
[extra space added]
The other two accounts xxx and xxx show no detail of any rebate being paid on refinancing or settlement. Please explain why there is this discrepancy between accounts?

Second. It is apparent that the PPI has been applied despite your chronological sequence of events (received under Reference R) showing details on the first three accounts that I was in receipt of a War Disablement Pension. In fact you required me to send details of the War Disablement Pension as proof of part of my income before the loans accounts were approved.

Third. None of the account statements show any breakdown with regard to the direct debit premiums of what proportion is for the loan capital and what proportion is for the PPI and interest.

I am now convinced that I was mis-sold these PPI policies for the following 7 reasons:

1. Responsibilities When Underwriting a Policy of Insurance: On each occasion, when the details of a loan were discussed your Direct Line sales advisors failed to check my personal circumstances at the time of the sale, which they are under obligation to do when underwriting a Policy of Insurance. If they had done so, they would have realised that the PPI policies were useless to me. At no time was any attempt made to ascertain if the product provided was fit for purpose, suitable for my needs or if indeed it was required at all.

2. Alternative Insurance Cover: Your sales advisors in each case failed to ask me if I had any alternative arrangements for insurance cover. My employer has a generous illness package which would cover a period of sickness as follows: 6 months full pay followed by 6 months half pay. I would also be entitled to a generous redundancy package and a substantial payment would be made in the event of my death in service (more than suffice to clear the balance of the loan).
[extra space removed]
3.Failure to Supply Important Information with Regard to Significant Policy Exclusions: I was most definitely not informed that the PPI policies could contain certain exclusions which could affect me and my ability to claim on the policies if I should need to. Additionally I was never told that Pre Existing Medical Conditions could invalidate my policy and I was never asked if I had any Pre Existing Medical Conditions despite your advisors being aware I was in receipt of a War Disablement Pension. One element of this pension includes back injury which I know is an exclusion in PPI Policies. I also believe that I would also be excluded on at least one other existing condition.

4.Widespread PPI Mis-Selling:I am now aware of the widespread mis-selling of PPI by some financial institutions, following recent media coverage and recent OFT, FSA and Competition Commission investigations and inquiries regarding the mis-selling of PPI. I believe this is borne out by Point 3 above. I am also aware that the question of PPI cover is the subject of an ongoing inquiry by the Competition Commissioner The provisional findings have just been released as a news brief on 5 June 2008.

5. Wholly Inappropriate PPI Selling - Employee Bonuses: I understand that some employees are paid higher bonuses if they get prospective creditors to take out PPI with loans. How can the best interests of the customer possibly be met, if there is a clear conflict of interest between your responsibilities to me, and the drive of your employees to sell Payment Protection Insurance whether it is suitable or not in order to receive bonuses?

6. True Nature of Single Premium PPI Not Explained: No explanation was forthcoming from any advisor on any occasion on the full extent of single premium PPI policies or the fact that they would offer little or no refund if the loan was settled early or if the insurance was cancelled. The statements you have forwarded on accounts xxx and xxx, show no element of any refund of PPI or PPI interest when the accounts were refinanced or settled. There was also no explanation that the cost of the PPI premium would be added to the total cost of credit and interest added for the full term of the agreement. I believe this practice is unlawful.

7. Unfair attachment of PPI with no competition involvement: I now believe that the single premium PPI policies attached to the loan accounts were both extremely unfair and totally unreasonable and offered me very little, if any protection value whatsoever. Furthermore I believe in light of the preliminary finding by the Competition Commission that the PPI was unfairly attached as there was no opportunity for me to seek competitive Insurance. I am therefore requesting a full refund of all costs including all single PPI premiums that have been paid, the interest added to these premiums and the PPI proportion of the direct debit payments, that I have paid over the life of the account agreement.
[extra space added]
Furthermore as I believe I have been unlawfully deprived of this money, I also expect the repayment of the interest at the Statutory Interest rate of 8% to be applied to of each of the single premiums and the PPI proportion of the direct debit payments.
Details of the single premiums for each account with the interest payments made are as follows:

Account No. xxx
Insurance premium £521.73 Monthly direct debit £183.75 x19 payments.
No rebate of PPI on refinancing.

Account No. xxx
Insurance premium £613.03 Monthly direct debit £215.90 x11 payments.
Insurance rebate of £254.05.

Account No. xxx
Insurance premium £1,301.15 Monthly direct debit £274.99 x8 payments.
No rebate of PPI on refinancing.

Account No. xxx
Insurance premium £2,552.79 Monthly direct debit £330.01 x11 payments.
Insurance rebate of £1,507.96 on settlement.
[extra space added]
If I do not receive a favourable response to this letter, I will pursue my claim through the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and indeed the Courts if necessary.

Hope these help you out just amend to reflect your own claims

aa

	The Direct Debit Guarantee • The Guarantee is offered by all Banks and Building Societies that take part in the Direct Debit Scheme. The efficiency and security of the Scheme is monitored and protected by your own Bank or Building Society. • If the amounts to be paid or the payment dates change, we will notify you three working days in advance of your account being debited or as otherwise agreed. • If an error is made by us or by your Bank or Building Society, you are guaranteed a full and immediate refund from your branch of the amount paid. • You can cancel a Direct Debit at any time by writing your Bank or Building Society. Please also send a copy of your letter to us. This is a term of your banking contract and you can sue on it.

[alanalana]

Hello olives,

let me know if you have a claim pending and I will help if I can

a

[citizenB]

Originally Posted by yourbank

I got sacked for gross misconduct. Even spoke to the press
Bank employee who posted advice on websites is fired - Business News, Business - The Independent

I can't answer your question but all RBS Group employees should have a Group bank account as part of their terms of employment.

Sorry to hear this yourbank.

[OLIVE.FAMILY]

Hi AA. Thanks for the letters they are brill. This is a link to my thread so that I dont keep hijacking yours. any advice would be great.

Hbos Ppi

Thanks

olives xx