PPI from over six years ago

[mcfadwmc]

i'm looking to do a ppi claim where the policy was taken out seven years ago but payments to the loan (in part to get the ppi ) finished three years ago.

what would be implications of limitations act. would it be six years after policy was signed or when last payment was made to it.

or does it not matter for ppi policies as there is mis-selling/concealment etc

[Fred_Funk]

As far as I can see, it's exactly the same as bank charges, ie you can argue against the Statue of Limitations because of the act of concealment involved and that's precisely what I would do if I was issuing a court claim.

As regards making a complaint to the FOS, the FSA handbook says...

DISP 2.8 Was the complaint referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service in time?

DISOP 2.8.2 The Ombudsman cannot consider a complaint if the complainant refers it to the Financial Ombudsman Service:

(1) more than six months after the date on which the respondent sent the complainant its final response; or

(2) more than:

(a) six years after the event complained of; or (if later)

(b) three years from the date on which the complainant became aware (or ought reasonably to have become aware) that he had cause for complaint.

So, on that basis, you should be okay!

Fred_Funk

[di0430]

Hi there.

Its always best to check to see if the company were covered by GISC, because I know the FSA did not come into action until Jan 2005.
Because I know the fos can only investigate complaints if these firms were covered by the above at the time of taking out the policy.

I have an issue with at least one of mine, where one of these were marginally missed from under jurisdiction, annoying I know, but then there is always court action.

If you check your paperwork, if you still have any there should be a company reg number, you can check out on the FSA website in the register search which should confirm if they were regulated or not.

If you don't mind me asking, who was the loan with ?
Maybe we will be able to confirm this right now.

Another thing, if you no longer have the paperwork, I would request a Subject Access Request (Subject access request), although this costs £10, they must supply you with all the information they have on you on that account etc.
They have 40 days to comply to this.

There is a template (Subject Access Request) in the library index page.
Please send by recorded post though - this way you can track this down on the royal mail website.
They cannot deny on receiving this then.

My only concern is you mention this was over 6 yrs ago, they should supply all information going back as far as 6 years, so you may not receive the data/information from the beginning, but then you state it finished 3 yrs ago, they should supply this and maybe the calculations of the breakdown of when this was settled.
It may even come to the point that you can also try to reclaim under a "unfair rebate" settlement.

Whatever you decide to do, good luck !
But if you require further info - just yell here.

Di.

[mcfadwmc]

thanks for the info

it was with a small company called spot finance.

it's for gf's car which she had ages ago on a HP deal. she didn't even know there was PPI on it and our complaint was originally going to be about the amount she was unlawfully forced to pay after VT'ing the car (£600+).


the PPI on this agreement will a bonus really as we've already got most or all of our claims for PPI settled or awaiting fos decision. i had one with welcome that i lost in court several months ago so hopefully they'll settle before that stage. this one's a cert though as she was a student at the time and not employed

all the original paperwork has been kept and so not too bothered what the Subject Access Request digs up as i've got the important stuff

on a separate note about the six year rule and data protection, i had a claim against GE where they were sharing data that was from lets say 1998-2004 with cred ref's when i checked in 2007 but woiuld only supply info from 2001-2007 so they refused to give details of 1998-2001 even though they'd happily share it with CRA's!! Information Commissioner`s Office didn't want to know as usual either