Competition Commission confirms ban on point of sale PPI. Some good news. http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/press_rel/2010/oct/pdf/ppi_remittal_press_release.pdf The Competition Commission (CC) has confirmed that it will introduce a remedies package based around a point-of-sale prohibition for all forms of payment protection insurance (PPI) (with the exception of retail PPI1May) after detailing how it will benefit customers. This follows the CC’s provisional decision on this issue, which was published in this year. The point-of-sale prohibition would stop the completion of sales of PPI during the sale of the associated credit product such as a personal loan. It was one of a package of measures the CC planned to introduce following its investigation into PPI, which concluded that businesses that offer PPI alongside credit face little or no competition when selling PPI to their credit customers. The report and in particular the proposed point-of-sale prohibition were the subject of a legal challenge last year to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) by Barclays, supported by Lloyds Banking Group and Shop Direct Group Financial Services Ltd. Whilst upholding the CC’s conclusions as to the competition problems in this market, the CAT ruled that it must in particular consider further the role and importance of a potential drawback to the prohibition, namely that it might inconvenience customers.

OFT Factsheet on PPI, July 2010. This factsheet looks at the issues that most frequently crop up, when consumers bring disputes to the Financial Ombudsman Service about payment protection insurance (sometimes called “PPI” or loan protection). http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/factsheets/payment-protection-insurance.pdf

Does the documentation not state if it was up front or monthly PPI? You need that information and the duration, APR etc before doing the calculation. You may want to consider issuing a SAR so you get access to the information- ask for everything related to you in every format. I can't do the calculations but there are others on here who are excellent!!

I have reported this for you Guy and someone should help you soon. Good luck!!

News item from the Scotsman http://business.scotsman.com/business/Bankers39-appeal-delays-payouts-.6580365.jp Bankers' appeal delays payouts Published Date: 14 October 2010 By JEFF SALWAY Thousands of consumers waiting for compensation over the mis-selling of payment protection insurance face long delays because of the British Bankers' Association's challenge against new complaint-handling rules. The BBA has requested a judicial review of Financial Services Authority (FSA) rules coming into force in December requiring banks to reassess previously rejected PPI complaints dating back to 2005. The case is unlikely to begin before April and could last for several months. Complaints unaffected by the judicial review will still be processed, according to the BBA, led by chief executive Angela Knight. But hundreds of thousands of claims will be effectively put on ice until it is over. The BBA said that where this is the case, customers will be contacted by their bank. It added: "Customers should be assured that all complaints will be reviewed - even those delayed by this judicial review process. "There is no deadline for receipt of complaints. If customers have a problem regarding PPI they should contact their bank and, if necessary, complain in the normal way." Its line was backed by high street banks including Royal Bank of Scotland, HSBC and Barclays. Lloyds Banking Group previously said it would not consider any PPI claims until the judicial review was complete. However, Lloyds told The Scotsman that while there may be a delay if clarity was needed from the FSA or the Financial Ombudsman Service because the judicial review may impact on the complaint, claims not affected by the review would be resolved.

I can well understand your anger Heatman but I feel it is ill judged and misdirected. This site, in particular, along with MSE and other sites have been at the forefront of many fights championing the consumer. There are lots of folk who give up their time freely on this site and have done so since 2006. You join in October 2010 and make such suggestions, please give me a break. We are perfectly willing to offer you support and advice on PPI or other issues. Thats why most of us are here, because we believe in righting wrong. Please remember that this has just happened and it will take time to develop tactics that are in the best interests of claimants. Maybe you have a positive and worthwhile suggestion to make, if so, please let us know.

Proceed to reclaim these charges. Issue a SAR so you have a full list of them.

Unfortunately, they are correct and have been accommodating to you in the past, as you say. The test case went against us a only a very few hardship cases are successful. As you are working, I don't see you being successful. Could you cancel DDs to avoid this situation arising and pay by another means.

Hi, I would ask this question on the consumer forum. Good luck!

Ask the internet business for proof of the transaction as there might be an error in the inputting of account numbers etc. Hope it gets sorted, good luck and keep us posted!!

Hello again. I see you've posted the same question again which is something we have all done. If it helps, we can merge the posts into 1 thread so that you can keep a track of things. Good luck!!

You are most welcome and we are glad you came to our community here at CAG. Feel free to start a thread in any of the forums that interest you and just ask for help whenever you need it. Folk on here are very helpful and we can point you in the direction of good advice. Best of luck!!

Good to see theres more than 1 cynic about. Good luck!!!!!

Hi, I answered your query to the same question on the PPI forum, which is here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?111-Payment-Protection-Insurance-(PPI)

Well Heatman, its certainly begining to look that way, unfortunately. We all know what happened with bank charges and the cynic in me is alive and well. However, we don't have all the pieces of the jigsaw yet and there's quite a bit of information needed.

This is looking like a re run of the OFT bank charges saga....................................... UPDATE FROM MSE http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/reclaim/2010/10/banks-join-lloyds-in-freezing-ppi-claims Banks join Lloyds in freezing PPI claims Guy Anker News Editor 13 October 2010 Lloyds Banking Group has been joined by many of its rivals in freezing payment protection insurance (PPI) claims. The move is in defiance of Financial Services Authority (FSA) rules which state all claims must be heard while a landmark legal case on PPI reclaiming is ongoing (see the Banks' PPI block MSE News story and PPI Reclaiming guide). Barclays, HSBC and Royal Bank of Scotland have confirmed they will put complaints on hold pending the result of a case brought by the British Bankers' Association (BBA) to block moves by the FSA to ensure millions of mis-selling victims receive payouts that could top £2 billion. Only Santander, of the major banks, will still hear complaints. It is also refusing to support the legal case. A statement today from the BBA, which is leading the banks' campaign to freeze claims, says not all complaints will be put on hold by its members. But its executive director Eric Leenders, speaking to MoneySavingExpert.com, accepts the majority will be frozen. The BBA says the FSA is aware of its move and has offered no resistance. When quizzed on the matter, the FSA reiterated a statement issued on Friday which said: "In the interests of consumers, firms will be expected to continue handling complaints while this process is ongoing." PPI is designed to cover loan or credit card payments if you cannot work but it has been mis-sold for years. Some 24 firms have faced FSA action and over one million consumers have complained over the past five years. What complaints will be frozen? The BBA and the banks stress it is impossible to give specific examples of what cases will be put on hold. The issue centres on the fact the BBA is arguing, as part of the legal case, that its members have been required to follow FSA rules on PPI sales yet the FSA only clarified what is expected of them this year, and now expects banks to have followed those updated guidelines in the past. The BBA says this is unfair as the regulator is applying regulation retrospectively. For this reason, it wants to block FSA rules, due to come into practice in December, that force lenders to contact those sold in a similar fashion to victims who have already got compensation. It's thought almost three million people could be entitled to compensation under this ruling. So, where banks believe consumers are complaining about mis-selling that falls under the new FSA guidelines, the case will go on hold. But as this is so vague it could give them free rein to put most cases on hold. The BBA statement says: "Our members will continue to handle all PPI-related complaints in accordance with FSA rules. Where the assessment of the complaint would not be affected by the judicial review, these complaints will be handled in the normal way. "If your complaint will be impacted by the judicial review, and cannot be resolved at this point, then your bank will write to inform you." What can consumers do? As things stand, the Financial Ombudsman Service, the independent arbitrator, is still hearing complaints. You must complain to your bank and wait until a firm rejection, or if the issue has not been resolved within eight weeks, before involving the Ombudsman. A whopping 81% of consumers who complain to the Ombudsman on PPI win their case. Yet only an average of 5% of rejected complainants, across all product sectors, take their case to the arbitrator. Were banks to win the case, reclaiming could end, so don't delay in making a claim. An initial result is expected in early 2011 though the loser is likely to appeal.

Hi there If Vanquis said it was not insurance, what did they say it was? It seems like a form of insurance to me, otherwise, what are you paying for?? Why do you think it was mis-sold?? Do a search on this in the forum as there are other posts on the same subject and you will see that others have tried to claim this back. Please keep us posted

http://www.bankingtimes.co.uk/2010/10/13/ppi-complaints-handling-delayed-by-judicial-review/ PPI complaints handling delayed by judicial review by Gill Montia Story link: PPI complaints handling delayed by judicial review The British Bankers’ Association (BBA) looks set on a collision course with the Financial Services Authority (FSA), having said it will only continue to handle Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) complaints where the assessment of the complaint would not be affected by the outcome a judicial review launched earlier this week. The BBA has filed papers with the High Court asking for a judicial review of some decisions made by the FSA and the Financial Ombudsman Service, in relation to PPI. It is contesting proposed new rules on complaints handling due to be implemented at the end of this year, stating: “Everyone’s actions must be assessed on the basis of a proper understanding of the relevant law and regulation and this procedure will bring this about.” The FSA has responded, by promising a vigorous defence and added that, in the interests of consumers, firms will be expected to continue handling complaints while this process is ongoing. The BBA has, however, assured consumers that all complaints will be reviewed “even those delayed by this judicial review process”. According to the regulator, in the last five years there have been more than a million complaints made to firms about PPI and in 2009/2010 alone, customers referred 49,196 complaints to the Ombudsman who then upheld nine out of ten in the complainant’s favour.

Same issue- update from Financial Times http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/7da0f454-d6ae-11df-98a9-00144feabdc0.html?ftcamp=rss Lenders put PPI complaints on ice By Josephine Cumbo Published: October 13 2010 12:24 | Last updated: October 13 2010 12:24 Tens of thousands of consumers who have lodged payment protection insurance (PPI) mis-selling complaints face delays in having their disputes resolved as banks mount a legal challenge against new complaint handling rules. The British Bankers’ Association (BBA) the industry body, said on Wednesday that complaints which would be directly impacted by its request for a judicial review “cannot be resolved at this point”. The announcement comes days after the Financial Services Authority, which is contesting the judicial review, ordered banks to continue handling PPI claims while the legal challenge was underway. The BBA said its members “would continue to handled all PPI-related complaints in accordance with the FSA’s rules”, but those whose outcome would be affected by the legal challenge would be treated differently. “There will be some complaints which will be directly impacted by the judicial review, and which cannot be resolved at this point,” said the BBA. “If your complaint is among these, your bank will write to inform you.” However it added: “Customers should be assured that all complaints will be reviewed - even those delayed by this judicial review process.” The BBA did not make clear which claims might be put on hold. But some legal firms, which deal with PPI compensation claims, say all their claims have been suspended. “We called Lloyds for an update on an existing claim and they basically said that we are not doing anything at all with existing claims while the judicial review is taking place,” said James Kafton, chief executive of PPI Claimline, a compensation claims firm. “It’s very difficult to know what to tell customers as the FSA said that it expected complaint handling would be unaffected by the judicial review.” Another claims company said thousands of its customers claims had been left in limbo. “We have been told that all our existing claims have been put on hold,” said Mike Ransom, managing director at Investor Compensation, a claims firm. “The lack of clarity about how these claims should be dealt with is alarming.” Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Lloyds TSB and Halifax, and HSBC, the world’s biggest bank, have pubically stated that they back the BBA’s line. Santander, the Spanish-owned bank, however, is not getting involved in the legal action being pursued by a number of UK banks and said “we will continue to deal with any issues our customers put to us regarding PPI in accordance with FSA rules.” PPI is designed to cover loan repayments for unsecured debts in the event of accident sickness or forced redundancy. However, since the FSA took on regulation of PPI in 2005 it has taken enforcement action against 24 firms largely for mis-selling. In the last five years there have been more than 1m complaints made to firms about PPI. In 2009/2010 alone, customers referred 49,196 complaints to the Ombudsman which then upheld nine out of ten in the complainant’s favour. The FSA said it “strongly” believed that a package of new complaint handling measures, announced last year, was a “sensible and fair solution” for consumers and the industry alike. The FSA said: “We repeat that firms are expected to continue handling complaints while the judicial process is ongoing customers,” said the FSA. “Customers who are unhappy with the way their complaint has been dealt with can take their cases to the Ombudsman.”

Update from the BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11532197 Hundreds of thousands of claims for compensation for mis-sold loan insurance will be put on hold for months until a legal wrangle is over. Banks will delay old claims relating to the sale of payment protection insurance (PPI), the British Bankers' Association has announced. These cases will only be completed at the conclusion of a judicial review into the issue, it said.

Praise for Santander's stance on PPI http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and-loans/ppi-mis-selling/article.html?in_article_id=516367&in_page_id=506&position=moretopstories Opinion by Tony Hazell 13 October 2010 The Daily Mail's Personal Finance Editor gives his view on another shameful action by banks on payment protection insurance. Only one bank stands out from the crowd... Congratulations to Santander for standing out against the traditional banks in their latest bid to ride roughshod over consumers. The Banking Bullies Association has launched a Judicial Review over the FSA and Financial Ombudsman's approach to payment protection insurance mis-selling. The FSA and Ombudsman simply want the banks to treat their customers fairly. The concept of fairness apparently has no meaning to those inhabiting the corridors of Lloyds, Barclays, HSBC and RBS, so they are demanding a legal definition. But Santander has other ideas and has the courage to stand out against this latest attempt to batter consumers. This is a statement of intent by the bank to treat its customers fairly on all occasions. Those whose complaints are fobbed off by others should take note.

It appears Barclays have followed Lloyds according to http://www.mortgagestrategy.co.uk/loans/barclays-latest-lender-to-defy-fsa-on-ppi/1020128.article Barclays latest lender to defy FSA on PPI 13 October 2010 | By Natalie Thomas Barclays has become the latest lender to defy the Financial Services Authority and put on hold any complaints regarding Payment Protection Insurance that might be impacted by the forthcoming judicial review. Yesterday, Lloyds Banking Group announced that customers can continue to log their complaint with the bank but no decisions will be made concerning sales related PPI complaints whilst the judicial review is ongoing. Today, Barclays, owner of former secured loan lender First Plus, has revealed that it is putting a portion of its complaints on hold as well. A spokeswoman for Barclays, says: “All PPI-related complaints will be reviewed as we receive them - if they are impacted by the issues covered by the judicial review and therefore cannot be resolved at this point then we will write to the customer to inform them of that. “Complaints on matters not affected by the judicial review will be assessed in the normal way.” The British Bankers Association has applied to the courts for a judicial review of the FSA’s complaint handling approach. The BBA says the FSA’s procedure for PPI complaints risks setting a precedent which will allow the regulator to apply new rules to previous sales for any financial product. The FSA recently published a policy statement and open letter to the industry advising they should consider complaints about PPI not just by reference to the detailed conduct of business rules which applied at the time but also to standards that are based on the FSA’s guiding principles for doing business. This could result in more than 2.5 million people being refunded as much as £2.7bn in total. Santander however says it will continue to deal with all PPI complaints. The BBA says: “We believe the FSA is effectively creating a precedent which permits it to apply new rules to previous sales – even where those sales were regulated by other FSA rules. “Therefore this ruling might not only affect customers who have bought PPI, but might also set a precedent that could affect all products regulated by the FSA.” The BBA says it has been necessary to take action because there is insufficient legal clarity about what the FSA and FOS is proposing in this area. The FSA says it will contest the British Bankers’ Association’s judicial review of new PPI complaints handling measures. The FSA says in the last five years there have been more than a million complaints made to firms about PPI. In 2009/2010 alone, customers referred 49,196 complaints to the Ombudsman which then upheld nine out of ten in the complainant’s favour.

Latest update from BBA http://www.bba.org.uk/media/article/payment-protection-insurance-complaints-handling Payment Protection Insurance - complaints handling 13/10/10 "The BBA's members will continue to handle all PPI-related complaints in accordance with FSA rules. Where the the assessment of the complaint would not be affected by the judicial review, these complaints will be handled in the normal way. If your complaint will be impacted by the judicial review, and cannot be resolved at this point, then your bank will write to inform you. "Customers should be assured that all complaints will be reviewed - even those delayed by this judicial review process. There is no deadline for receipt of complaints. If customers have a problem regarding PPI they should contact their bank and, if necessary, complain in the normal way." Updated factsheet from BBA http://www.bba.org.uk/download/5709 Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) Why the BBA is bringing a judicial review What is PPI? PPI is an insurance product which covers the risk of a borrower being unable to repay their borrowing. It typically covers accident, sickness, unemployment and life cover, but the detailed terms and conditions of different policies will vary. It is usually paid for either as a single up front premium (usually added to the amount of the underlying loan provided) or by separate monthly instalments. Until recently, banks offered to arrange PPI for customers alongside their credit applications. What is the case about? This judicial review is not simply about PPI: it is about the ability of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) to apply new standards to old sales. The FSA recently published a policy statement and open letter to the industry advising they should consider complaints about PPI not just by reference to the detailed conduct of business rules which applied at the time but also to standards that are based on the FSA’s guiding principles for doing business. The BBA has applied to the Courts for a judicial review of (i) the FSA’s approach contained in its policy statement, and (ii) the Financial Ombudsman Service’s approach to PPI sales complaints contained in its guidance. We believe the FSA is effectively creating a precedent which permits it to apply new rules to previous sales – even where those sales were regulated by other FSA rules. Therefore this ruling might not only affect customers who have bought PPI, but might also set a precedent that could affect all products regulated by the FSA. C:\Documents and Settings\brian.mairs\Desktop\PPI factsheet 131010.DOC 13 October 2010 I have lodged a mis-selling complaint with my bank. What will happen to this complaint? The BBA's members will continue to handle all PPI-related complaints in accordance with FSA rules. Where the the assessment of the complaint would not be affected by the judicial review, these complaints will be handled in the normal way. If your complaint will be impacted by the judicial review, and cannot be resolved at this point, then your bank will write to inform you. Customers should be assured that all complaints will be reviewed - even those delayed by this judicial review process. There is no deadline for receipt of complaints. If customers have a problem regarding PPI they should contact their bank and, if necessary, complain in the normal way. How long will this all take? The BBA is working with the FSA and the FOS to ensure that these matters are resolved as swiftly and fairly as possible. The industry felt that there was no alternative but to go to judicial review, as discussions with the FSA and the FOS have not enabled the issues to be resolved. The specific day that the judicial review will be heard is ultimately a matter for the Court to decide but we are hopeful that time can be made available within the next few months or the early part of 2011. British Bankers’ Association Wednesday 13th October 2010

Good luck! I would maybe push the fact you have had a water supply for so long and the obvious need for access to a secure water supply. If you have children, mention them and any medical conditions. How did you pay your neighbour his share of the water rates- any proof of that, any written agreement or witnesses?

Hi Loz, sorry to hear of the hassle you are having. Have a look at this info re deposit protection schemes http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/Privaterenting/Tenancies/DG_189120 Good luck and let us know how you get on. Best of luck in the new house!!