First Plus - Single cover to first named borrower only ?

[feebs]

Dear All

My partner and I currently have a loan (£34,000) with First Plus (taken out in July 05). We were 'persuaded' to take out PPI which cost us £8, 326.60.

I'm about to send off a 'misselling' template letter to reclaim, but am really confused as to what cover our PPI provides. My partner was self employed when we took out the loan so my name is the first name on the PPI agreement. On the agreement it puts us both as Insured Customers (my name is listed first) - but on the actual loan agreement it states "You have chosen to protect your repayments with the FIRSTPLUS Payment Protection Plan. You will have joint life, and single accident, sickness and involuntary employment cover. Single cover applies to first named borrower only.

I'm totally confused - does this mean that we would both have been covered by the PPI or not ?

Any help very very gratefully received

Fiona

[Braveheart Bear]

Afternoon feebs,
Sounds like their standard policy.
If your name is the first name on the loan, the the policy will be Life, accident, sickness and unemployment and your husband will be covered for life.

The issue as I see it for you, is did they mis-sell you the policy in the first place.

Have you requested your Subject Access Request paperwork, well worth the £10.00 as they provided much more evidence to myself, and by the souns of it, Bog as well. See the links below.

BraveheartBear v FirstPlus

Bog vs First Plus PPI - Formula help needed.

Finlander V Firstplus

	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.

[feebs]

Many thanks for quick response..

I believe they did mis-sell as firstly they made no mention that the policy was only valid for five years but we would end up paying interest on the insurance for the full loan term. My main reason however, for wanting to claim is that we would never have taken this insurance if it meant that only I was covered for sickness, accident and unemployment. If my partner was sick, became unemployed or had an accident I would never be able to make the payments on my own on top of mortgage payments etc.

We were not told that this insurance was only suitable for one of us and on the PPI offical agreement it lists both of us as insured customers.

Would be really grateful if this would give more clout to my claim

Many thanks for your help it's much much appreciated

Feebs