Thread: A & L Ppi

Just about to throw myself into the breach with A & L. After some rather interesting and eye opening reading on this forum I SARred A&L and received full statements with a week! Loan was originally taken out on 31/12/03 for £6500. According to the statements I received the PPI was added on at the beginning of the loan eg;
Insurance principal=1249.48p
interest on insurance=£308.72p

This loan is still ongoing - I have 7 payments left. I'm currently on a reduced payment plan with them due to a drop in income but if they repay me this PPI it will effectively wipe out the loan. How does this letter sound for starters?

I believe I have been mis-sold a payment protection insurance policy and would like to request a full refund of my premiums, plus interest paid. I took out a £6500 loan on 31/12/03 and also bought a payment protection policy which would cost me an extra £1.558.20p over the life of the loan. I would like to cancel this insurance policy as it is not fit for purpose. It was not explained to me at any time that there were exclusions within this policy that would apply to me and make me unable to claim. It was also not explained to me that similar or better insurance cover for this loan could be bought elsewhere at a much more competitive rate. My personal circumstances were not questioned at any time during this loan application and my belief was that if I did not also take out the PPI at the same time as applying for the loan, then my loan application would be refused. I was not asked if I had insurance cover elsewhere which would cover this loan. The PPI was never explained to me at all nor were the terms and conditions of the small print fully explained to me. I never received an insurance policy which I should have done and am only aware of this now after taking advice.

Insurers are under an obligation to ensure that the policy they are selling is appropriate to that customer and clearly you have not fulfilled this requirement.

I am requesting a full refund of all my insurance payments, plus interest, which total £1,406.41p.

I hope that you will enter into a sincere dialogue with me about this matter and I am writing this letter to you on the assumption that you will prefer to do this than merely respond with standard letters and leaflets. I will give you 14 days to reply to me accepting, unconditionally, my request in principle and letting me know a date by which I will receive payment.

If you do not respond, or you do not respond positively, within this time period, I shall send you a letter before action giving you a further 14 days in which to reflect. I believe that this time frame is sufficient for a large company such as yours with its dedicated staff and departments. After that, there will be no further communication from me and I shall issue a claim at the expiry of the second deadline for the full amount plus the 8% interest allowed by the courts, plus my costs, without further notice.

Similar Threads:

• help with PPI & Welcome
• ppi & hsbc loan & credit card
• Me vs Welcome PPI (struggling to work out PPI & Interest)
• Gingi1 v PPI (FD, Co Op & M&S)
• Not Fair & Reasonable ?? For A Bank To Default & Terminate Ppi Ppp

Received bog standard reply letter on 22nd July;

Dear Deb4TLJ
Thank you for taking the time to contact us to highlight your concerns.
We are currently looking into the issue you have raised and will let you have our response as soon as possible.
Alliance & Leicester is committed to resolving complaints as fairly as possible and our leaflet explains the actions we will take.
(Deb4TLJ refers to leaflet - "By Day 56 blah blah blah" - you think so huh!?!)
In the meantime, if you feel the need to discuss this matter further please contact me on 0845 300 4881.

Yours sincerely
Leon Cameron
Customer Care Team Manager
Group Customer Relations

Good luck at least they responded unlike GE!

Originally Posted by adamski

Good luck at least they responded unlike GE!

You couldn't make it up could ya!!!!!!!!!

Received this today;








I did indeed apply for this loan online, however I do not remember ticking the "yes" box as they state in their letter and I have no proof of this in the SAR stuff they sent me. I also did not receive a Certificate of Cover as stated in the letter above nor the accompanying letter that confirmed I had opted for the Policy - there is also no trace of these documents in the SAR paperwork they sent to me. They also state in the letter above that the opportunity to contact their offices to discuss the Policy further was made available to me and a copy of this letter was sent to me. I did not receive this letter or any information pertaining thereto and there is again no copy of this letter in the SAR documentation. This below is the copy of the agreement A&L sent me in the SAR;








The T&C's that were included on the SAR - all of these agreement documents are on seperate sheets of paper. (The red ring on the T&C's is mine).




I am very tempted to ring the guy in the first letter and ask where all these missing documents are. I have a long standing mental health problem and it is only recently - with the help of the good folk on here - that I have been made aware of the fact that I could never claim on any of the PPI policies I have ever taken out! What should my next step be?

Originally Posted by Paintball

Hi Deb

Thanks for posting up your letter, the response you received and the documents A&L have sent you from your S.A.R - (Subject access request) request.

Despite the fact that your application was made online, A&L are still regulated by the FSA's guidelines on properly advising loan applicants to ensure that you fully understand what the PPI is for and whether it will suit your circumstances, also what the alternative options are, i.e., where else you can obtain PPI and the cost implications to you.

Loan applications are described by the financial industry as 'Advised' or 'Non-Advised' (i.e. whether or not you had a nice little chat with the broker) but even if you were not advised/spoken to, you are still entitled to receive fair and balanced information from the lender about every aspect of the loan in particular, the PPI element, that will allow you to make an informed choice.

The documents attached don't appear to contain anything other than standard blether, nothing that will help you to make an 'informed decision'!!

I doubt whether you would have elected to take PPI, had you known the true cost of the loan with PPI added and the much cheaper options available to you.

A & L don't appear to have made all the information available (or clear) to you and the response from David Burrell is, to my mind, dismissive.

I think that you should write another letter to Mr Burrell pointing out the regulatory aspects (I'll give you a hand with this if you like) and giving him 14 days in which to reconsider his stance. A negative response from him will mean that you take your complaint to the fos for return of the PPI and interest.


Hope this helps ...

Hi Paintball, thank you so much for your input. That's exactly the part I don't get - I had always been led to believe that the PPI was not optional as when I received the agreement forms to sign the PPI had already been added (as is obvious in the SAR agreement in a post above). At no time did I receive any documentation regarding the PPI policy and no documentation relating to the policy was included with the SAR paperwork. I did not think they could sell a PPI policy without some sort of means questionnaire or at least some advice from a qualified person. If this advice had been made available to me and the exclusions within the policy explained I would never have signed the agreement (which already had the PPI in place). I would most certainly appreciate your help in drafting a reply to David Burrell.

Evening Deb

Of course, the lender always wants to 'lead' us into believing that PPI is not optional, albeit in a subtle way. The implication is that the onus is on you, the borower, to ask specific Qs about the PPI. But the whole point is that you are not informed and don't know what Qs to ask, you repose absolute faith in the lender to provide you with accurate information which works in your best interest and that they know best.

This is what they want us to believe, and why the majority of borrowers have ended up with cumbersome loan agreements, and with payments that are crippling because of the hefty PPI amount with interest on top!!!

Grrr ... rant over

Here's your response:


Date


Your Ref xxx

Re: Account xxxx


Dear Mr Burrell

Thank you for your letter of 1 August 2008.

I write to inform you that I am not satisfied with the response you have provided to my initial complaint. I assert that I have been mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) taken out on the above named loan account, by your organisation.

Whilst the loan application was made via your website and therefore conducted in a 'non advised' capacity, Alliance and Leicester still had an obligation to me the borrower, to provide sufficient and appropriate information to enable me to make an informed decision as to the suitability of both the loan and the PPI to meet my needs and financial circumstances. I should also have been made aware of alternative options available, or comparative costs of similar PPI products from other suppliers, which information as a well known financial institution, you would most certainly have had access to.

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) provides guidelines which your organisation should adhere to while making both Advised and Non-Advised sales. Where a Non-Advised sale takes place, as in my own case "The customer must, however, still receive sufficient information on the product to enable them to make an informed decision as to whether it meets their own demands and needs." (FSA)

At no point did I receive any such information, either by letter, document or telephone call which followed the above guideline. The documents that you have provided copies of do not contain any of the information that I have outlined above and cannot, therefore, be deemed as meeting the standard of care which you should have provided.

I reposed absolute trust in your ability as a financial institution to provide a reasonable level of care and skill in ensuring that my best interests were met when taking out a loan with your organisation. This has not been the case and I am extremely shocked and disappointed.

I would further suggest that the Principles of Business which are legally binding on Alliance and Leicester under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and which are contained in the FSA Handbook, have not been followed. Therefore you are in breach of regulations.

I request the return of (insert amount here plus interest) within 14 days of receipt of this letter by you. If you do not comply with my request, I will have no option but to refer my complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (fos). I should remind you that the FOS take the issue of mis-selling of PPI extremely seriously and in many cases, have imposed large fines on financial institutions who are in breach of regulations.

Yours sincerely


Your name here


Hope you'll excuse any spelling mistakes, as I'm a bit tired. Hope this is OK for you ...


Painty x

Originally Posted by Paintball

Evening Deb

Of course, the lender always wants to 'lead' us into believing that PPI is not optional, albeit in a subtle way. The implication is that the onus is on you, the borower, to ask specific Qs about the PPI. But the whole point is that you are not informed and don't know what Qs to ask, you repose absolute faith in the lender to provide you with accurate information which works in your best interest and that they know best.

This is what they want us to believe, and why the majority of borrowers have ended up with cumbersome loan agreements, and with payments that are crippling because of the hefty PPI amount with interest on top!!!

Grrr ... rant over

Here's your response:


Date


Your Ref xxx

Re: Account xxxx


Dear Mr Burrell

Thank you for your letter of 1 August 2008.

I write to inform you that I am not satisfied with the response you have provided to my initial complaint. I assert that I have been mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) taken out on the above named loan account, by your organisation.

Whilst the loan application was made via your website and therefore conducted in a 'non advised' capacity, Alliance and Leicester still had an obligation to me the borrower, to provide sufficient and appropriate information to enable me to make an informed decision as to the suitability of both the loan and the PPI to meet my needs and financial circumstances. I should also have been made aware of alternative options available, or comparative costs of similar PPI products from other suppliers, which information as a well known financial institution, you would most certainly have had access to.

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) provides guidelines which your organisation should adhere to while making both Advised and Non-Advised sales. Where a Non-Advised sale takes place, as in my own case "The customer must, however, still receive sufficient information on the product to enable them to make an informed decision as to whether it meets their own demands and needs." (FSA)

At no point did I receive any such information, either by letter, document or telephone call which followed the above guideline. The documents that you have provided copies of do not contain any of the information that I have outlined above and cannot, therefore, be deemed as meeting the standard of care which you should have provided.

I reposed absolute trust in your ability as a financial institution to provide a reasonable level of care and skill in ensuring that my best interests were met when taking out a loan with your organisation. This has not been the case and I am extremely shocked and disappointed.

I would further suggest that the Principles of Business which are legally binding on Alliance and Leicester under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and which are contained in the FSA Handbook, have not been followed. Therefore you are in breach of regulations.

I request the return of (insert amount here plus interest) within 14 days of receipt of this letter by you. If you do not comply with my request, I will have no option but to refer my complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (fos). I should remind you that the FOS take the issue of mis-selling of PPI extremely seriously and in many cases, have imposed large fines on financial institutions who are in breach of regulations.

Yours sincerely


Your name here


Hope you'll excuse any spelling mistakes, as I'm a bit tired. Hope this is OK for you ...


Painty x

Totally excellent letter! Thank you so much Painty - will be sending this off immediately. XXXXXXXXXXX

Originally Posted by alanalana

Painty,

you are most welcome. Daughter number 2 lives in NE, north of Newcastle be there on Thursday for a play with 3 grandchildren I will only last an hour at the most

deb4tlj sorry to seem to be hijacking your thread not intended

aa

No worries my love - I've read numerous posts of yours on the forum and your advice and input is always most appreciated. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Well the response to my letter was a letter in this lunchtimes post that stated that they acknowledged receipt of my payment for this month - remember I'm on a reduced payment plan with them - but that this falls short of the agreement previously agreed - I have letters from them stating that they accept a reduced payment of £100.00 per month and agreement to run till 2nd December 2008- and that they are now cancelling this arrangement and are demanding payment of arrears of £92.29. They also kindly state that they haven't charged me for this letter but any future letters will incur a charge of £25.00!!!!!!!!! It's signed by Justin Jones of the collections department.
What the hell do I do now? I think - in fact I'm positive - they've cancelled this arrangement because I'm trying to claim back the PPI.

Just to qualify my statement regarding retaliatory action on the part of A&L , their action in withdrawing the agreed payment plan runs contrary to the statement of the Financial Services Authority of 6th July 2006 in which it ruled such action to be discriminatory.

If Deb were to initiate court action, then the account in dispute letter would apply directly within the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) Pre-Action Protocols. If she were going to take the complaint to the Financial Ombudsmen, then some double checking on this would be necessary, I agree.