Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Santander PPI on Debenhams Store Card


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3371 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

Just about to start a claim for PPI on Debenhams store card.

I will use the same arguments that I made to Egg who paid up.

I will also refer to the agreeement they sent me , which has large crosses against the signature boxes to indicate where I should sign . They have put a large cross against the PPI box .

My recollection is that I signed up for the card in store , at the till point because they were offering 10% off purchases.

 

I will keep you posted on progress, but would be interested in hearing from anyone about their experience with Santander and how they approach claims.

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi Wfloss

 

Good luck with your claim, i have found Santander one of the most stubborn to deal with, have a read of my thread, it is a long one and now i'm currently in a court case with them......... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?309207-Debenhams-Store-Card-PPI-***Urgent-Help-Required*******

KatieJ :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I have submitted claims to Santander for PPI on a Debenhams and HOF store card.

 

I was doing some research and came across the PPI example in the FSA handbook.

So being a saddo , I reconstructed my claim using the layout in the FSA handbook and both produce higher amounts than my claim. I just wanted to check that the scale of the claim was the same so am happy that I have not overstated my claim.

I have estimated PPI back to 2000 so am sure Santander will take issue with the amounts and the claim probably as I can't seem to find many success stories on store card PPI.

 

Would really like to win these though as just going through the transaction log has been a revelation . They charge 1.50 per £100 for PPI and 29.3% APR , so they have certainly had their moneys worh out of me.

Of course I knew this, but it is only when I have looked at the detail and started to add things up, that I realised how stupid it is to use storecards especially if you don't pay them off each month!!!

I will be closing these accounts as soon as this process is completed. Hopefully ending with two nice fat cheques.

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

HI

Santander have refused my claim and referred me to FLA.

Reading other threads on here sounds like they are a waste of time so will ring FOS tomorrow.

Their basic argument is that I had 30 days to cancel,had a copy of T& C and PPI clearly indicated on my monthly account. Their sales people at the time (2000) would have explained this was optional and that I had signed the box saying I wanted it.

Does anyone know of any cases where they have had to repay?

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Another letter from Santander today refusing my Debenhams Store Card PPI , the one I got yesterday was a House Of Fraser Card.

 

Referred to FLA again , so rang FOS this morning and a not very helpful person said had never heard of FLA and I should ask Santander why they had done this.

 

Rang Santander who explained it was because they weren't regulated in 2000.

 

Rang FLA - left message no call from them.

 

Rang FOS , got a very helpful person this time who had heard of FLA. Explained that Santander Cards weren't regulated at that time, but FOS would deal with the underwriter so I need to quote the insurer.

 

If that isn't known , they will contact Santander . She simply asked me to send my questionnaire and they will take this up with Santander and gave me a reference and email contact.

 

So I guess I am in for a long wait . given their workload on PPI .

 

I also asked whether I was wasting my time based on the reasons Santander gave for turning this down, primarily because I can't find a successful Santander PPI on a store card on this Forum and as this seems to be trickier than loan PPI , it was good to hear that this wasn't the case.

 

While waiting on the phone , looked at the FOS stats on their website for the number of PPI claims , who from and the number upheld , it makes interesting reading and helps pass the time if you are in a queue on the phone to one of our large financial institutions.

 

Regards

 

W

 

So top tip,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks IMS

My luck had to run out as I was very lucky with my Egg claim. Also had what I consider to be a win with Nat West who have offered to repay late payments - the interest is rubbish , but I never expected them to repay anything without a fight.

I have just emailed FOS with all the details and have asked about timescales.

 

Hopefully will be tackling Barclays next who have not responded to my SAR withing the time limit as they are trying to track down all the paperwork. Hopefully that is true as I know that I paid PPI on several loans that had balances from the previous ones.

So get your calculator charged up as I may need help!

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi

FOS have asked me to submit my claim to Financial Insurance the underwriter, who should respond within 8 weeks.

 

Reading other threads on here I am following the same path as others who are now waiting for FOS to deal with this issue of PPI pre 2005 with companies like GE Capital.

 

I am following the advice, but struggling to see how the underwriter would pay up , and not Santander Cards ( GE Capital) also pondering who benefitted from the interest charged on PPI.

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

The agreement for the card was with GE. Their agreement stated PPI payable. PPI was charged on the card statement. The PPI was not sold to you by an insurer...it was sold to you by agents of GE. GE applied the PPI charge to the card and charged subsequent interest on it (if any). GE had the benefit of that interest and the profit earned on it.

 

GE are responsible for the refund.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi IMS

It seems odd that FOS are sending people to the underwriter , but there are several other cases on here where they have done that. what I expect to happen next is be referred back to Santander , then back to FOS when it is refused again.

I have read in one thread that FOS are trying to unravel who is responsible, given these arrangements were made before they were regulated by FSA.

 

I can't pretend that I understand why there is a difference and they won't pay up because of a pre 2005 agreement

 

FOS technical guidance refers to general Insurance guidelines prior to 2005 and their position is quoted below:

The ombudsman has noted that there is much in common between the present statutory regulatory-regime and the non-statutory provisions that preceded it (and, indeed, the position at law). The non-statutory provisions no longer apply as specific requirements on those selling insurance. But the ombudsman considers they still represent a helpful guide to good industry practice.

 

FOS must be dealing with a lot of these claims on store cards so it must be in their interest to establish the position on this.

 

My issue is that although I signed up in 2000 , I have been paying this until very recently , so I sort of think that the FSA guidance should apply. These insurances are unusual in that they are not for a fixed term or renewed annually, so I don't think they should be able to hide behind the fact that they weren't regulated when I signed up. Also FOS is saying previous insurance guidance is very similar.

 

Obviously in for a long wait on this , but others are ahead of me so it will be interesting to see what happens .

Just out of interest , your win went back many years - did they make similar arguments?

 

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

My one was actually quite straightforward....complaint letter, fos questionnaire. Took them the full 16 weeks but then up popped an offer so job done.

 

We must not forget that with fos, it is the banks who pay their wages.

 

Also, the way I look at it is that you didn't have a contract at all with any insurance company/underwriter or anyone else. The contract is with GE/Santy and the ppi relates to the contract you had with them. It is mentioned in the contract (even if it was mis-sold).

 

You're right, you might be in for a long process unless you take the other option and go through court.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

isn't it strange that some are easy and other claims go round in circles - obviously some technicality on the company the contract is with and how they were regulated at the time.

 

I don't want to go to court , hats off to those that do. I will let continue with FOS and see where that goes.

 

I have other fish to fry with Barclays , which should be more straightforward , if only they would fulfill my SAR ( complaint in progress)

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Address below

They were pretty quick responding/ rejecting which I think in my case is easy for them due to it being pre 2005 , but I have seen quite a few sucesses for cards taken out after 2005 , so hope your claim falls into that category.

 

Good Luck

Regards

W

Complaints

Santander UK PLC

PO Box 1125

BRADFORD

BD1 9PG

Link to post
Share on other sites

subbing....

GE MONEY - DEBENHAMS CARD

Settled in full after prelim :)

 

MBNA

Settled after LBA

however mistake made by me on contractual interest so going after the rest now

SETTLED IN FULL JAN 2007:)

 

MINT

Offer after prelim rejected

Settled in full after LBA:)

 

to go:

Barclays Bus Ac - to mcol

Barclays CC - to mcol

Nat West (over 6 years) no action taken yet

Creation Financial - awaiting statements since Dec

Goldfish - offer after prelim rejected

and some more

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

After reading TINKS thread . I have decided to write to Santander challenging them on their reasons for refusing my claim and referring them to FSA guidance and their recommendations on what approach should be taken with pre 2005 claims. They gave a final response but hey ho I have nothing to lose.

 

I have stated that they have taken the exact opposite approach when considering my complaint and have given reasons that the FSA say should not be used to reject claims.

 

I have also written to the FSA about pre 2005 sales and the difficulties consumers are experiencing and asked them what they are doing about this.

 

I doubt this will make any difference , but I feel better

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Can anyone advise please.

One of the accounts was upgraded in 2008 and I was given a new account number.

I vaguely recall trying to use my card in store and the assistant was having problems processing the transaction. They were upgrading all the accounts at that time and they decided they could sort this by setting up a new account.

I wasn't provided with two agreements with my SAR, but could this constitute a new account ?

My thinking is that this is after 2005 and that part of my claim should be dealt with by Santander

Thanks

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Received a reply from FSA , who I wrote to expressing my concern that there were many people having difficulty making claims for missold PPI because the companies were not regulated by FSA when the agreements were taken out.

Thought I would share their response

 

Response from FSA

 

I understand that you have a complaint about mis-sold payment protection insurance which was sold to you in 2000. Your concern is that a large number of consumers, including yourself, will be unable to make a complaint about this, as general insurance sales were not regulated until 14 January 2005, and so, the providers of the insurance are unwilling to consider the complaint. As these are then rejected by the Financial Ombudsman Service (the Ombudsman), you would like to know whether the Financial Services Authority (FSA) can comment on this situation.

 

I appreciate the time you have taken to contact us about this, and that this has been triggered for you, by the complaint you have. I thought it would be helpful to explain the role of the FSA, why these complaints may not be able to be considered by the Ombudsman, and your next steps, in the event that the Ombudsman cannot help.

 

The FSA is the independent regulator of financial services firms in the United Kingdom, and we authorise and regulate the majority of financial services firms in the UK. As you correctly state, prior to January 2005,. the advice and sale of general insurance was not regulated, and so, in some cases, consumers are experiencing difficulty in making a complaint. However, prior to 2005, insurance companies could choose to sign up to the General Insurance Standards Council (GISC), which was a voluntary agreement for insurance companies, but, once joined, compliance with the council¿s code of practice was compulsory. Where firms were a member of GISC, it is within the remit of the Ombudsman to consider complaints about them. Where they were not, the Ombudsman does not, unfortunately, have any jurisdiction to consider the complaint, except where the firm has given permission for it to do so, under what is known as voluntary jurisdiction.

 

The Ombudsman will be able to advise whether the firm that is now part of Santander was a member of GISC, and, if so, it should be able to help you. it is important to note that, as an independent organisation, it is for the Ombudsman to decide whether they can help. If they cannot, then you may wish to consider seeking legal advice as to the possibility of pursuing your claim through the courts. I appreciate that this may be an expensive option, but suggest that you speak to your local Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) in the first instance, to see if they can provide you with any further information about making this claim. I have attached a link to the CAB website where you can find your local office:

 

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/index/getadvice.htm

 

There is a search box at the bottom of the page which you can use to find your local office.

 

I realise this may not be the response you were hoping for. However, I have explained that some insurance companies were covered by GOSC

 

www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation

 

and via the Money Advice Service website at:

 

www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/.

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi

I was advised by FOS to send my complaint to the underwriter after Santander said they were not regulated when I took out the cards in 2000/2001.

 

Genworth Finacial have responded saying they did not sell the policy , so are not in a position to investigate or comment on the sale of the policy. They have forwarded this to Santander.

This is the Final Response from the underwriter.

 

So as expected we have gone around in a complete circle as Santander have already given their Final Response and they weren't regulated so FOS can't go after them.

 

When FOS advised that I submit my claim to the underwriter they sent me a complaint form to complete if I wasn't happy with the response I got.

 

I am not sure what FOS plan to do when I submit my complaint , but they appear to be giving this advice consistently .

 

I haven't come across anyone that has moved beyond this stage and have seen some cases that were at this stage in 2009.

 

Baffled!

 

Regards

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...