Thread: Clydesdale missold PPi - something strange going on!

Hi all

Mate just paid the last instalment to her 5 year unsecured personal loan with Clydesdale Bank and was a happy chappy...until she received her first ever statement for the loan which showed almost £2K allocated for PPI.

Being completely computer illiterate (yes we point and laugh at her at times lol), she knew for a fact she refused it and came to me as she has heard me bang on about the CAG

Basically, her and her husband (joint loan) consolidated a card and loan with this loan and the advisor did try the PPI sales pitch. Friend flatly refused as she was self employed and husband (first named on policy) worked for local government which gave more than enough cover for sickness/accident/death as a benefit - they also operate a no redundancies policy.

They remember going through all this, getting the agreement slid across the desk, they signed and that was that. Now she is fuming, but fighting it.

Full SAR sent and they supplied only 2 and a half years statements for the loan...but here's the strange thing, and input appreciated!

For the first 34 payment on the loan the full monthly instalment of £234 was deducted from their bank a/c....but only approx £175 (rises slightly month to month)was being paid to the loan a/c

Then on the 35th month, the full £234 leaves the bank a/c every month and goes straight to the laon a/c until it hits zero.

My guess is that the missing amount from the first 34 payments will add up to the full PPI cost, meaning that they only paid the PPI over 34 months but were charged interest over the full 60? Until she gets the rest of that statement we have no idea but:

does this mean anything to anyone, or am I barking up the totally wrong tree?

(I will also add that between their scanned copy of the CCA and her original - the signatures are VERY different...and her copy is down as unsecured and their copy has the secured box ticked?! Something is going on!)

Thanks again

I can't advise much on this but find it VERY interesting. I was missold PPI by Clydesdale but when I sent them a SAR they said that they could only supply info on accounts where statements are supplied, and they don't supply statements for loans (It was a few years ago but I certainly never had any statements).

If she was paying interest on the PPI I believe that might invalidate it by the way.

I signed up for PPI or I wouldn't have got the loan, but I distinctly remember having a seperate agreement for it. According to my bank statements I only paid one amount which makes me wonder if it was a multiple agreement.

May be worth looking at this. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ml#post1845581

Hmm interesting. The multiple agreement angle is defo for keeping on the back burner on this one just in case - thanks for that

The loan statement looked more like just a printed off transaction history of the a/c - so saying statement is probably slightly misleading, but what they told you still sounds like big fat fibs!

How did you get on with that PPI, any luck?

Thing is, I think that one off statement only came through because of those new regs making lenders supply statements for loans etc....but as she had literally just paid it off, it was sheer luck they sent one just then or they would NEVER have known about it! Loan was over, no further obligation to provide info!

She has demanded the missing info - will update when we get it, my nose is twitching now

Oh, just to add, even though friend send a full SAR they sent only the basics for the a/c's and letter to say that she has to list EXACTLY what info she wants or they won't suppy it. That is one helluva list to typ up, they must think we won't and go away

I thibk, like you Caro, they are skirting round their DPA obligations with folk

Very strange, just found a link to my thread on Twitter...for some claims management company???

The secured / not secured thing is interesting.
It would be interesting to find out if the loan was ever secured, there must be a way of finding this out. I don't know if you could ask your mortgage supplier if there was ever another loan secured against your property.

If you do find out that there was never a loan secured, and they are claiming it was, when your copy of the contract says it wasn't, then this could be an interesting case as they have clearly altered the contract, which from a legal stance would probably null and void the whole contract ... I guess meaning they should repay the full amount paid plus interest.

Im not sure on this though, but as a starting point it could be good to find out exactly if the loan was secured or not. Altering a signed contract is clearly fraud, so if you can prove that the loan was never secured and that they've altered the contract they'll be in a world of trouble and I would throw the book at them.

Originally Posted by Dipply75

How did you get on with that PPI, any luck?

Other events in life took over when I started investigating this so I haven't dealt with this yet. I need to get on to it myself

Originally Posted by Dipply75

Oh, just to add, even though friend send a full SAR they sent only the basics for the a/c's and letter to say that she has to list EXACTLY what info she wants or they won't suppy it. That is one helluva list to typ up, they must think we won't and go away

I thibk, like you Caro, they are skirting round their DPA obligations with folk

I'm afraid they're notorious for this. Complain to the Information Commissioners Office, and also try contacting Clydesdale's compliance department. Some peeps have had success following this route.

Originally Posted by Dipply75

Very strange, just found a link to my thread on Twitter...for some claims management company???

Hmmm. Is there any mention on your Twitter about this, or anything to identify you on here?

I did a simple google search on Clydesdale Bank mis-sold PPI and a Twitter for ClaimLine UK came up - they had a link to my thread on their 'updates' bit....I don't have a twitter.

Doesn't bother me personally but just so CAG knows, I think it's a bit cheeky to use a link to your site to essentially help advertise their 'service'.

Do you want the link?

Actually just had a look at their sit and their T&C's and they charge 20% +VAT and £250 admin fees for various things. Not the sort of company I think anyone should consider using, and not linked to the CAG : (

As for the DPA waffle from them, sending this:

letter before action
Section 7 – Data Protection Act 1998

Dear Sir/Madam

Accounts: XXXXXXXX

I am in receipt of the documents that you have supplied in response to my Data Protection Act information request dated 3rd July 2009. The disclosure of personal data is incomplete in that at least the following documents are missing.


1) You have failed to provide a complete list of transactions and charges. Only a partial transaction statement for loan account no XXXXXXXX was provided from only 16/10/06 to 15/06/09 - 27 months are missing.


2) You have provided no notes, or documents relating to any Insurances, including payment protection insurance i.e.: No demands & needs statement, no pertinent personal, employment or health checks relating to the suitability of the policy, no details of the insurer or underwriter, no screenshots of the application, no financial Breakdown (premium, commission, insurance premium tax payable).


3) You have provided no notes, or documents relating to instances of manual intervention, details of any charges or security held on my property or data communicated to third parties (credit reference agencies etc).

This is not an exhaustive list by any means, it is just an example of some of the information I am missing.



In your letter dated 7th July 2009 you quoted Section 7, subsection 3 of the Act, stating you are not obliged to comply with any request unless you are supplied with such information as you may reasonably require to locate the information that person seeks and you will not supply any other account information unless I can quote specific account numbers.
Details of my other accounts would be directly linked to the accounts already quoted as my personal loan consolidated my other accounts and they were all serviced from my bank account. Therefore I believe the details I have already provided are more than adequate for locating any previous accounts, especially in a banking institution with integrated computer systems and would be in a ‘relevant filing system’. My local branch is able to see all these accounts instantly just by inputting my bank account details.
I find your assertion that you are unable to provide anything except the basic account details without further information misleading, wrong and wholly unreasonable and interpret this as a deliberate attempt to stop me from accessing the personal data relevant to my complaint against the bank.
Should you insist that I have not provided enough information to locate the information I have listed as missing, please confirm this, along with your reasons and I will refer the issue to the Information Commissioner to decide. Please also confirm the name of your nominated Data Protection Officer.
Accordingly, I have to tell you that you have not yet complied with your obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998.

You have a further 26 days to comply

And they sent a questionnaire that asked basically everything except the colour of my grannies underwear:

Full financial details from the date of application, salary, outgoings, dependants, full employment circumstances, loan details, loan application details, PPI application details, recollection of events, the works!

Basically asking for everything that should be in their system anyhoo. So sending letter saying not filling it in as you should have all this already, and gave answers to why it was mssold (again).

Not only should they already have the information, if you had it you wouldn't be asking for it. Salary, outgoings, employment details etc are not details they need to comply with a SAR. I would complain about that to the ICO too.

Regarding the claims company if you'd send a link to my CAG email which is my username followed by @consumeractiongroup.co.u k I'd be grateful. I don't know if anything can be done about it, but it's worth looking into IMO.

Why would anyone want to pay for something they can do themselves for free.

Sorry Caro, did not make that post clear. The questionnaire was for the PPI claim. Over 20 questions! Sent this letter, will update with their response:

I am in receipt of your letter dated 9th July 2009 and am extremely unhappy at the apparent delays in investigating my complaint. I do appreciate you have 8 weeks to resolve my complaint but I have been given no explanation as to why this has been delayed again, yet I am now being asked to complete a questionnaire, in what I can only assume is an attempt to gain information about the sale of the insurances disputed which should already be in your records.

I am confused by this request, weeks after receiving my initial complaint, which already stated my reasons and I also clearly explained my reasons to the branch manager when attempting to lodge this complaint on 19th June 2009. I am also very concerned that almost the entire questionnaire is asking for details you should already hold in your system from our loan application, and am at a loss as to why you require me to try and find time to dig out old financial details etc and provide these again. The only questions I need to answer (again) are questions 18 to 20 – which I assume I have to provide more detail on (again).

After 3 weeks it is clear that the basic paperwork involved in the sale has not even been reviewed yet. Again, I expect a review to ensure the sale of the above mentioned policy was fair, reasonable and in my best interest and the relevant facts to be taken into consideration:

1 - Our employment status at the time, which was clearly explained to your advisor at length whilst applying, would have actually rendered the policy useless. I was self-employed and (I now note) not even covered as the 2nd person on the agreement. Mr Friend worked for our local authority, XX Council, which provided more than adequate accident/sickness and death benefit as a standard work benefit, and operated a no redundancies policy. I can find little or no circumstance in which Mr Friend would have been able to make a claim. Any extremely limited circumstances in which he MAY have been able to claim were then certainly not worth the cost of this expensive insurance.

2 – We explained at length our employment circumstances to your advisor and, despite a very strong (and in my opinion very misleading) sales pitch, we completely refused the insurance. Your advisor made no attempt to explain relevant exclusions, ask health related questions, complete demands & needs etc, or provide any ppi details, leaflets or booklets as we had already refused the offer. The agreement was literally slid across the table and we were asked to simply sign the bottom.


4 – Considering the sales pitch used by your advisor and his actions in then adding an expensive policy to our loan anyway despite being aware of our circumstances and refusal, I can only assume your advisor had a financial interest in selling this policy. Please confirm if your advisor received any commission or incentive, whether bonus or target related or not, for the sale of this insurance.


In your response to my Subject access request, you state you have provided all information relating to this loan account. I note you have supplied absolutely no documentation relating to the PPI, despite my specific request for this. No demands & needs statement, no pertinent personal, employment or health checks relating to the suitability of the policy, no details of the insurer or underwriter, no copy of the application. The PPI element details were specifically requested and was also part of this loan therefore you have not supplied all the relevant information and I require copies of these documents.

Even though you have provided a statement showing only half the transactions on a 60 month loan, I note the for the first 34 months the full monthly instalment of £234.62 was deducted from the servicing bank account, yet only varying amounts of between £175-£185 were applied to the loan account? I will require a full explanation of this along with the other irregularities on my account but in this instance, please clarify if this monthly shortfall was in anyway related to my Insurance payments. I am concerned that I actually paid the PPI element of the loan in 34 months yet was charged interest over 60 months.

Further to this, I have still received no acknowledgement or response to the serious issues raised in my letter of 3rd July 2009 and require clarification on these matters also - explanation as to how the signatures from a ‘scanned’ copy of the agreement can be different, the need for a ‘cooling off’ period and if this loan was processed as ‘secured’. Please also clarify urgently if there has been any security place on my property.

I have not returned your questionnaire for the reasons listed above – every question is requesting details you should already hold in your system - but have answered the relevant questions in this letter. Should you have any further genuine queries please ensure these are put in writing to which you will receive a prompt response. Should you require extra time to review the sale of my PPI policy or you feel I am not entitled to this review, please confirm this along with your reasons.




As stated in my letter dated 19 June 2009, unless my complaint has been investigated and there has been some attempt at resolution within the 8 week timescale, I will pass this to the fos for investigation and I will be advising them of your failure to follow your own complaints procedure.



In Summary

Actually now investigate my complaint and confirm your findings urgently.
Provide the information missing from my Subject access request
Confirm if your advisor received any incentive for the sale of this insurance.
Clarify if the shortfall in payments to the loan account relate in any way to the PPI.
Acknowledge and clarify the irregularities in the loan paperwork – differences, signatures, security, cooling off period etc.