Single premium with picture. illegal or just immoral ??

[honestbob]

Hi i have asked before but i am still not sure, i have just re-mortgaged and settled a loan with picture finance . i am really annoyed that i have only had the loan 14 mths and have paid over 6,000 in a single premium insurance, this is of course extortionate but do i have a case to ask for that money back i have signed a seperate agreement that says i agree to the insurance but i did not realise i would not be refunded, it seems to me that single premiums are a con trick against those who are in need of finance but do i have a legal right to ask for a refund. i am really not sure as i was aware of the insurance.
really would appreciate some help !!
Thanks Bob

[Sparklez30]

The FSA have said that there should still be a refund even on single premiums paid up front so I would definately ask for a refund for settling early! Have you checked about all the info around here to see if you feel the insurance may have been mis-sold (e.g if you're self employed, if they told you you had to take it to get the loan etc etc).

It definately doesn't hurt to try to get a refund for settling early anyway

[alanalana]

Hello honestbob,

firstly welcome to the CAG you will get lots of help on here but remember PPI is a new field on reclaiming.

As you have a single premium then you have the right to reclaim your PPI.

You have had the PPI for 14 months and the Financial Services Authority ruling came out on 14 Jan 2005.
Check this thread for links to information on claiming PPI before and after 2005.

Payment protection | Were you mis-sold PPI? | PPI - rules before 2005
Payment protection | Were you mis-sold PPI? | PPI - the rules

I believe that your loan taken out after the FSA ruling would mean:

You can cancel and get an immediate refund of the remaining balance of the PPI and as it was missold as single premium you should claim back your monthly payments made plus the interest. ( I am no whizz on interest but people on this site are ).

You have not given a lot of information but depending on the Consumer Credit Agreement (CCA) and the Terms and Conditions you were supplied with you may have more grounds for claiming misselling. i.e. self employed, pre existing medical condition etc.

Can you supply more information on your loan/PPI without giving account details and names?

hope this helps you start your claim

aa

[honestbob]

Thank you both very much, i have now drafted my first letter asking for a full refund on the grounds that the policy was misold i have original documentation but have not had access to any transcripts of the sales call etc, i am sure they were deliberately vague but they may have been clever enough to "stick to script" i have sent an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) seperately anyway.
i am pretty sure i was not told about interest being charged after the insurance ran out or that the policy gave a different version of cover to my wife e.g less cover, i believe the loan was concieved with the sole intent of making huge profit from the insurance policy rather than the loan product itself, i remember the adviser telling me that i would be likely to settle early in which case i would not need the cover beyond a certain point i hope all this adds up in my favour if i go to the ombudsman.
thanks alanalana for the links it seems a can of worms is being opened here maybe we will benefit from people power !!!

[alanalana]

Hello honestbob,

Good luck I will watch your posts to see how your claim develops.

If I can be of help I will

regards

aa

[honestbob]

Thanks everyone, i have had letter back from picture which basically systematically strips every argument i have and says from their point of view case closed. i am pretty convinced by their response in that i may not have a claim for mis-selling although i have reserved judgement until i get my s.a.r, in spite of this i will continue to ask for my money on the grounds that the amount i got dicounted was wholly disproportionate.
I am considering using conkers if i don,t get anywhere alone, any views on this welcome
Bob

[alanalana]

hello honestbob,

have you had a full response to your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)?

If they have failed to respond then a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (Information Commissioners Office) is in order pointing out their failure to respond to a Legal Statute namely the Data Protection Act 1998.

as you have had the brush off I would suggest immediate complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS)..
the details for the Information Commissioners Office and FOS are in this thread

links

keep at them
aa

[honestbob]

Alanalana thanks again for your support, yes they sent my s.a.r back with 2 official forms to request an s.a.r and asked me for another £10 because it was a joint loan. I have re-sent but i am pretty sure from the tactics they will delay for the full 40 days. i will keep at them i am holding out hope that i can spot a mistake when i get the s.a.r.
Bob

[alanalana]

Hello honestbob,

keep the CAG in the picture so folks can help out

regards
aa

[chickpea]

Were you aware that the ppi was for a 5 year term only? Picture gave us the impression that the ppi covered the whole term of our loan.

Our case is with the FOS at the moment and despite the first adjudicator upholding our complaint, Picture wouldn't accept this decision and wanted the actual ombudsman involved. Our preliminary decision by the ombudsman is again in our favour but Picture has been given another month to respond before his final decision is made.

I'm not surprised that Picture have fobbed you off as in our experience they have fought every step of the way despite writing in a letter to the FOS that they "can understand how Mr XXX may have felt mis-led when the loan consultant advised him that the insurance 'covers you for the first 5 years of the loan initially and then there'll be a monthly one come in after that'

Another thing we realised in the telephone recording was that we were never quoted a repayment amount which excluded the PPI so we didn't feel we were given the opportunity to understand fully how much the ppi was going to cost us each month on top of the loan repayments. In our opinion, this was a very unfair sales tactic and the ombudsman agreed that because Picture didn't provide the monthly cost of the policy then we were unlikely to fully appreciate the full financial implications of taking it out.

I hope this will encourage you to continue with your claim Good luck and let us know how things go.

[KaneCole]

Hi Chickpea. We have a very similar situation going on with First Plus and have just forwarded everything to the Ombudsman. Can you tell me the timescales, ie when did you first hear from the Ombudsman ? Did it take months ?

I have a separate thread running for my claim and am interested in how long I might have to wait.

Thanks

KaneCole

[chickpea]

Hi Kane

It has been a long process with the FOS because they are so busy and Picture seem to have dragged our case out for as long as possible.

We first wrote to the FOS in May 2007 and our case was passed to an adjudicator in September. Although she upheld our complaint, Picture refused to accept her decision and so we received a letter from her at the end of November stating that it was going to be passed to an ombudsman for further review.

At the end of April 2008 we received a provisional decision from the ombudsman again in our favour but giving Picture one more month to respond. That deadline passed yesterday so hopefully we will be issued with a final decision shortly.

I hope this helps and good luck with your claim

[honestbob]

Gr8 stuff Chickpea yes that does give me hope !! i am patiently waiting for the s.a.r to be delt with. just a point i picked up on today. it seems bizarre to me that picture have said i would have recieved ppi repayments of 25% after 3 yrs 15% after 4yrs and 10% after five years if i had not cancelled the policy. having paid in full for the policy at conception why am i not entitled to these payments as a refund, i will clearly not claim as i do not have the loan. If the policy is not dependant on the loan ie it is optional then by paying the ppi in a single premium i have honoured all obligations concerned with ppi. So why am i not entitled to the refunds promised. Picture have told me that i am not entitled as i no longer have a policy. but my position is that i have honoured the policy agreement and they have refused to honour the repayent schedule promised. At the very least i did not at any time believe the refunds would depend on the existence of the loan and this was never explained to me. mmm a bit confusing and maybe i am biased but all views as always welcome
Thanks All
Bob

[chickpea]

I think your point about the refunds is worth taking up with the FOS Bob. One of the points picked up by the ombudsman in our case was about the unfair cancellation term and Picture's duty to ensure that a customer fully understands how the agreement works and the penalty if the loan or policy was to be cancelled early.

I am sure your S.A.R. will be a great help to you

[honestbob]

Thanks again Chickpea, i am pretty confident that i was told there was no penalty for early repayment of the loan. I may find something more solid in the s.a.r. Why did fos say the cancellation term was unfair ??
Have there been any successes with picture or are we the pioneers ??
Hope you get your money soon.
regards
Bob

[chickpea]

I think the FOS felt the cancellation terms were unfair because of the small return on any refund if the policy was cancelled early and also if the conditions weren't explained properly at the point of sale. It was felt that because additional funds were borrowed for the ppi then Picture had an added duty to ensure the customer fully understood how the agreement worked.

The ombudsman basically said that he did not consider a 5 year policy resulting in over £8000 of additional borrowing was a suitable recommendation for us bearing in mind that we may well have needed to re-finance before the end of the policy period.

The only successful case I know of is one that Conker dealt with which is advertised on their web pages. If you have a case for mis-selling though then personally I think you might as well go through the FOS and save on the fees.

Regards
CP

[alanalana]

Hello honestbob,

The FOS will undoubtedly take longer but if you do FOS first and your complaint is no upheld by the Ombudsman you can then proceed to Court. If you go to Court and lose the Ombudsman would probably not consider your case.

aa