Thread: mbna ppi credit card-the next stage

Send a lba as well. This is just so that your paper work is all in order should you attempt the court route.

I would also ask for a copy of the PPI specialist training program, their assessment records and a copy of the 'stand alone team's' reviews for your year.
These are all items written in the letter above so they should be able to provide this.
If, when you go to court part of your agument is that the staff are not properly trained, they will have to provide evidence of this. Perhaps even the evidence relating to the specfic staff member that obtained your approval.
A copy of the script would also make interesting reading.

The only thing I am not sure about is the 6 year rule. Perhaps an expert and help you on that.

If you put what you intend to request in your LBA you might get a different response.

Originally Posted by tiger33

We note that your complaint relates to a period that is outside of the time limit for referral to the fos. The FOS will be unable to deal with your complaint unless there are exceptional circumstances.

This, as you might expect, is not entirely correct.

They're right that the FOS won't consider complaints dating from more than six years ago - unless, that is, you've only recently become aware that you had any grounds for complaint (as is the case with 99.9 per cent of people who've been mis-sold PPI).

In those circumstances, you have, as I recall, three years to complain to the FOS from the time you first became aware that this may have been the case - it's all on the FOS website somewhere; I have a print-out at home, which I'll post a link to tomorrow, though unfortunately I can't find it at the minute.

In the meantime, I suggest you say something like this...

As I am sure you are aware, the statute of limitations is not applicable in situations, such as this one, in which an unlawful act was deliberately concealed. Moreover, the FOS will consider my complaint because I have only recently become aware that my PPI was mis-sold.

... in any future correspondence with MBNA.

Fred_Funk

The following is from the FSA handbook...

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.

Tell MBNA to stick that where the sun don't shine! ;-)

Fred_Funk

Dear sirs,thank you for your letter dated 25-8-08 regarding ppc on my mbna credit account,I,ve just got to go over some of the points you make in your letter regarding why you were unable to refund my premiums.
(1)you wrote:-i note from your letter that you feel ineligible for the cover due to your employment status and are now requesting a refund,i confirm that even though you are self employed you are still eligible for the ppc,HOWEVER, there are certain criteria that must be met in order for you to claim[/font]
I,d like to bring a case that as just been upheld by the FSO that is the same http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/71/71-payment-protection-complaints.htm
Mr D had a small shop specialising in interior design. His complaint concerned the single-premium payment protection policy he had been sold when he took out a personal loan. He thought the business concerned should have realised the policy was unsuitable for him, as he was self-employed and therefore entitled to only a limited number of benefits under the policy.
When the business refused to refund all the premiums he had paid, plus interest, Mr D brought his complaint to us.
complaint upheld
We noted that the benefits available to self-employed policyholders were more limited than those available to employees. In particular, the redundancy benefit was only available to policyholders if their employer had ceased trading or had been declared insolvent. We accepted Mr D’s view that these terms were likely to make the policy less attractive to someone who was self-employed.
In this particular case, although the business clearly knew that Mr D was self-employed, it had not mentioned that this would limit the benefits he could get under the policy. The business had given him a written summary of the policy benefits. However, we did not consider that this leaflet adequately highlighted the limited cover he would get from the policy.
We concluded that the business had not given Mr D sufficient information to enable him to make an informed choice.
We upheld the complaint. We told the business to put the loan back where it would have been if he had not taken the policy, and to refund all of his payments for the policy, with interest.
(2)you wrote:-our records show that ppc was applied to your account following a telephone conversation with 1 of our specialist on 28 march 2000.at mbna we are not required to record 100% of our calls,we are however confident that our sales process is compliant.our associates are trained ans assessed to a high standard and as an additional measure,the bank conducts thorough call listening quality reviews on a regular basis,these are compleleted by both the team manager and a stand alone quality team within the bank.futhermore our staff receive regular coaching and feedback and are equipped with fully compliant script when offering ppc products.this script ensures all customers are provided with detailed information regarding the policy to allow them to make an informed decision.to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory requirements no advive or recommendtions are given as part of our sales process.[/font]
So without recordings,you don,t really know what your staff told me,I won,t disagree your staff may have a high standard now,but lets not forget this phone call you say I had was back in the year 2000 and you will of trained your staff over the past 8 years,what year did you start [FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']call listening quality reviews on a regular basis? If it was in place in 2000,could you please send me a copy of the PPI specialist training program, their assessment records and a copy of the 'stand alone team's' reviews,also you send our specialist called you,could you please send me qualifacations in 2000 of the specfic staff member that spoke to me,so the fso or court can decided if he/she is a specialist or not.

we do not require signed confirmation,as you agreed to the cover verbally and the t&c were issued
I don,t recall asking for it on the phone,surly if you went to the trouble of sending t&c out you would of sent a copy for me to sign, so you could be sure that i,d understood it and it was in my best interest to take it out,by you saying it was a verbal agreement over the phone that I don,t need to sign.makes me think it was in your best finance interest to take it out and not mine.

(4)you wrote:-since the policy was applied,updated versionsof ppc t&chave been issued.these were sent in may 2003 advising a change to the benifits and increase in cost,in nov 2004 confirming the change of insurers and the new policy details and more recently in jan 2007.these also provided you with further opportunity to contact us to discuss the details of the policy
Please send me the original versions of these from march 2000,may 2003,nov 2004 and jan 2007 just so I can look through them to see what changes have been made in the last 8 years to your t&c s.
(5)you wrote:-ppc premiums have clearly shown on each months statements,where a balance as been outstanding.the t&c of the cc state that it is the customers responibility to ensure they check each statement and contact us should they dispute any transactions
Once again I will refer to the fso news issue 71 aug 08 [/font]http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/71/71-payment-protection-complaints.htm
A trainee chef, Mr A, complained about the way in which he was sold a payment protection policy when he applied for a credit card. He said he had understood he was being insured, but had not been told that the policy was optional.
He said he was not given any information about the cost or benefits of the policy. And he stated that a representative of the credit card company had simply filled in the application form for him, written a small ‘x’ at the bottom of the form, and then asked him to sign his name next to the ‘x’.
The credit card company rejected his complaint. It said it was clear from the application form that the insurance policy was optional and that Mr A had chosen to take it. The company also said that the insurance premiums were itemised on Mr A’s credit card statement each month, so he must have been aware that he was paying for an additional – optional – product.
complaint upheld
We asked the credit card company to send us Mr A’s application form. We noted that on the final page, close to the space for the customer’s signature, there was a ‘tick box’ next to a statement that the customer wanted payment protection insurance. This had been ticked.
The tick in the box, the written details entered on the form, and the small ‘ x’ placed next to the signature all appeared to have been written in the same handwriting, using a ballpoint pen. However, the signature itself looked markedly different and had been written with a thick, felt-tipped pen. This tended to support Mr A’s account of events.
We also noted that Mr A had been 19 years of age at the time of the sale. This was the first time he had applied for any financial product or service other than a basic bank account.
We did not agree with the credit card company that it was clear from the application form that the insurance cover was optional. Nor did we agree that, by signing the form, Mr A had clearly indicated his wish to buy the policy. There was no evidence that he had been told anything about the cover at the time of the sale. And the fact that Mr A’s statement showed that the premium was collected monthly did not mean he must have been aware the insurance was optional.
We upheld the complaint and told the company to return to Mr A all the premiums he had paid to date, plus interest.
(6)you wrote:-the cover is an optional benefit and can be cancelled at any time.following my investigations,i note that you contacted us on 4 april 2007 to request the cancellation of ppc,inline with the t&c of the policy,we require 30 days notice to cancel the cover,therefore,a further premium should have been charged.however as a courtesy the cover was cancelled and we never took the premium of you
Whats this got to do with me requesting a refund,should I feel guilty for getting 1 months premium when I paid out £2700 out to them.



i regret to advise that i am unable to issue a refund of premiums,having considered all details of this case,i am satisfied that the cover was requested and that you have been covered in line with the t&c of the policy
i am aware that my response may not meet your expectations;however,i believe this issue has been fully addressed,it therefore appears that we have now exhausted our interal complaints proedure.consequently,thi s is our final response.[/font]
I would like you to review my case,due to the facts that I have brought to your attention.
(8)you wrote:-we note that your complaint relates to a period that is outside of the time limit for referral to the fos.the fos will be unable to deal with your complaint unless there are exceptional circumstances.[/font]
I,d like to bring to your attention from the FSA hand book 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.
I became aware of the mis-selling by you on or about 1-8-08 and even if you argue that I knew at the time I cancelled back in april 2007 I am still within the 3 year time limit to take it to the FSO.So I hereby give you 14 days to refund all monies in full plus interest or I will be sending my complaint to the FSO.