Thread: Advice needed on a PPI claim...please

Hi,
just had my 8 week response through from my lender stating that they did not sell the PPI to me and a broker did so they accept no liability.

I did go through a broker for the loan and there was a section filled in on their priority application form with regard to repayment protection and they were the ones who sold me the product. However there was a subsequant insurance application form direct from the lender that I had to sign (the amounts for the insurance were filled in after we returned it !!) and return.

The financial aspects of both forms bare no resemblance to each other, on the brokers application it was listed as a separate monthly payment yet on the lenders form it was stated as a capital sum which it eventually turned out to be, front loaded onto the loan.

I have argued with the lender that whilst it was stated by the broker that I had to have the insurance or the loan would not be granted they had a responsibility to ensure that the PPI was appropriate (HMG so no issues there), they had to explain full cost and all the other reasons etc etc etc and that what was eventually sold to me was not the product offered by the broker but the product sold by the lender.

Who do you think is responsible in this situation and who should I be chasing ?

Just a little more info on this;

On the initial priority application form from the broker it states;

REPAYMENT PROTECTION INSURANCE (please tick appropriate box if required)
Life, redundancy, accident & sickness cover £51.53 per month for 1st applicant (followed by a box with a 'Y' typed in).....for 2nd applicant (box with a 'Y' typed in and subsequantly NO scrawled across in biro by persons unknown after it had been returned)

On the lenders application form it states them as the agent.

1st customer name ?????? Address ??????? Age ??????
2nd customer name ?????? Address ?????? Age ??????

INSURANCES

Creditcare 1st customer (manual tick in box completed after we signed and returned) 2nd customer (empty box) Joint (empty box) Premium £3900 (filled in after we had returned this application)

It was the lenders insurance that applied to the loan, quite clearly there is no correlation between the insurance offered by the broker and that which applied to the loan, the sets of figures and the monies quoted bear no resemblance to each other at all.

So who should I be chasing ???

Hi Alanalana, thanks for the response, I was typing my next post when you replied.

The agreement is unregulated and it states;

YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR OPTIONAL CREDIT INSURANCE COVER THE BENEFIT OF WHICH HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO YOU. IN THE CASE OF JOINT APPLICATIONS IT IS SPECIFIED THAT ONLY hsbclinkdcms HAS THE BENEFIT OF OPTIONAL CREDIT COVER IF TAKEN UP.......this is all that is stated about PPI on the agreement.

The facts are that nothing other than 'take the insurance cover or no loan' was said, nothing about true cost and a whole host of other reasons etc etc there isn't even any mention on the agreement of the figures involved just a capital sum.

They are saying we didn't sell this to you and you are claiming miss selling so go to the broker who sold you it. The point I made in my second post is that it was clearly their insurance (figures and payments) that was used so they must be liable ??

Do you think I should go to the fos about the lender, if this fails would I get the second bite at the broker ??

Hi sorry for the delay (a slow typer !!)

The company I am dealing with is now CITI but was Future Mortgages.

Future Mortgages are listed as the insurance agent on the second insurance application form (the insurance that applied to the account) and are on the agreement as the lender.

Thank you very much.

Hi all been a while but I've just had this response from the fos;

I am sorry to have to tell you we are unable to investigate your complaint about CAP 1 because the event you have complained about (the sale of your PPI) took place on a date before the sale of insurance policies by this firm became covered by our jurisdiction and the transitional arrangements in place that can extend our jurisdiction in certain circumstances do not help in this instance.

However, I am presently investigating the possibility of raising your concerns with the underwriter of your policy, i.e. the insurance company who actually provided the cover under the policy. It would be helpful if you could provide us with any information you have on the underwriter of the policy, This may include copies of certificates of insurance or policy documents. Please send any documents you may have to me at the above address.

Unfortunately, I am unable at this point to give any indication as to whether the underwriter has (or is willing to accept) responsibility for the sale, but I will keep you updated on a regular basis with any progress we make.

Anyone any ideas with this, what's going on ? What can I do etc.

Thanks for looking.

Ok, I think I've got this...it's not GISC or FSA governed so they attempt to go the underwriter route.

Has anyone had any success with the fos using this route or should it now be a case of lba and the courts ??

Grateful for any help.

when did you take out the agreement with the insurance

was it before 2005

Yes, april 2004

leave this with me for a bit

ime sure they still had to be regulated

checking

Many thanks

It is true that if you bought your policy before 31 January 2005, then the seller may not have been regulated by the FSA. It is only companies that are regulated more widely by the FSA – banks, building societies, insurance companies – that will have been covered by the FSA before then.

If the seller was an insurance broker or some other seller, such as a car dealership selling PPI alongside finance agreements, then the sale of PPI would not have been regulated before January 2005. But you may still complain to the fos about PPI sold before then if the complaint is about a claim - where the policy does not pay out when you think it should do.

In this case it is the underwriters - the insurance company deciding your claim – that you are complaining about and these companies will have been regulated.

You may even be able to claim that a policy sold before 31 January 2005 had been mis-sold if you can show that the terms of the policy contract were unfair – again it would be the underlying insurer that you would complain against..

OK thanks, that is obviously what I'm going to have to do as far as the fos is concerned now...the problem now is trying to find out who the underwriters were !!

There was a broker involved that have since bee bought out by Cap 1 so I suppose my next step is them even though I had a nil return as far as the insurance policy was concerned on my SAR last year...ahh well !!

Well Capone Will Have Taken On The Rights And Responsabilities Of The Broker

Including Any Dodgy Dealings

Yes but I need the underwriters details and what's the betting capone are 'not in a position to supply them'.