From the telegraph today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/insurance/8059659/Lloyds-risks-FSA-clash-over-customer-PPI-complaints.html Lloyds risks FSA clash over customer PPI complaints Lloyds Banking Group is risking a clash with the regulator by putting some customer complaints about mis-sold payment protection insurance (PPI) on hold until a forthcoming judicial review is heard. By Emma Simon Published: 6:30AM BST 13 Oct 2010 Lloyds risks FSA clash over customer complaints The Financial Services Authority (FSA) reiterated that it expected all banks to continue handling PPI complaints during this legal process. Others banks, including Barclays, HSBC and Royal Bank of Scotland said yesterday they were reviewing their PPI complaints process; But a statement issued by the British Bankers' Association (BBA) last night said only claims "directly impacted by the judicial review" would be delayed. Last week the BBA announced it was seeking a review of FSA rules on PPI complaints. These rules, due to come into effect on December 1, would mean banks have to consider millions of PPI complaints against new sales standards, designed to stop highly pressurised sales tactics. This could lead to compensation for up to 3m customers, costing some £2bn. Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Halifax and Bank of Scotland, said while it was talking to the FSA and the Ombudsman it had "no option but to put complaints on hold." But the FSA is not expected to grant a general "waiver" effectively allowing banks to freeze complaints, as it did during legal action on bank charges. But the BBA statement indicates the FSA may accept some complaints will be delayed. Banks are required to tell customers if they complaint is affected by this review. Over the past five years the FSA has issued 24 separate enforcement procedures over PPI failings. The FSA said dissatisfied customers remained free to take their case to the Ombudsman, which currently settles around 80pc of such cases in the consumer's favour. PPI is routinely sold alongside loans and credit cards, but these policies can be expensive and riddled with exclusions.

Kate Please read this link http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/PPI.html

Hi there, sorry to hear of your difficulties- not very pleasant at all. Not my area of specialism but thought the following might point you in the right direction. The Consumer Council for Water The Consumer Council for Water (CCWater) is an independent organisation which can investigate complaints about the water companies. To contact CCWater, call them on: 0845 039 2837, or visit their website at: http://www.ccwater.org.uk. If CCwater find your complaint to be justified, they will ask your water company to put the matter right. CCWater's office will keep you informed about the progress of the complaint and will write to let you know the outcome. If CCWater can't resolve the complaint, it will refer it to OFWAT. Alternatively, if you aren't happy with the way CCWater has dealt with your complaint, you can complain to OFWAT yourself. OFWAT will only take the matter up if it is satisfied that CCWater hasn't dealt with your complaint properly. Office of Water Services (OFWAT) The Office of Water Services (OFWAT) is the independent watchdog set up by the government to monitor and regulate the activities of the water companies. You can contact OFWAT at: OFWAT Centre City Tower 7 Hill Street Birmingham B5 4UA Tel: 0121 625 1300 Textphone: 0121 625 1422 Website: http://www.ofwat.gov.uk Email: [email protected]

More from the Express http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/205015/Banks-aim-to-block-insurance-refunds BANKS AIM TO BLOCK INSURANCE REFUNDS Some card holders have already received payouts Wednesday October 13,2010 By Esther Shaw Have your say(0) CONSUMERS who believe they have been mis-sold loan insurance by their banks are being urged to act fast to claim compensation. The call comes from campaigners after news that the banks are to challenge forthcoming rules on controversial payment protection insurance (PPI) policies. The British Bankers’ Association (BBA) has filed papers with the High Court asking for a judicial review of some decisions made by City watchdog, the Financial Services Authority (FSA). Lloyds Banking Group, which includes Lloyds TSB, Bank of Scotland and Halifax, said it was putting any complaints currently in the pipeline on hold while it sought clarification from the FSA over how to deal with them. There are fears other banks could follow suit, leaving thousands of mis-selling victims in limbo. PPI is designed to pay out if customers can’t meet credit card, loan or other repayments, perhaps due to illness or redundancy. Campaigners say the cover is overpriced and widely mis-sold. For example, many borrowers have been wrongly told the cover was a precondition for having their loans approved. In August, the FSA published new measures aimed at fairer treatment of customers buying PPI and better handling of complaints. The FSA announced the crackdown, which included guidance on paying redress and when firms should review past mis-selling complaints, following rejection by the banks of tens of thousands of complaints about the policies. The watchdog gave firms until December 1 to adopt the new rules. However, the BBA has now decided to launch a legal challenge against the measures. The BBA is contesting the FSA’s measures on the basis that this could open the door for retrospective regulation and could set a precedent which might then be applied to other products. The industry fears the regulator could force banks to pay redress for past sales practices which were not specifically outlawed at the time. “It has unfortunately been necessary to do this because there is insufficient legal clarity about what the FSA and Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) is proposing in this area,” said a BBA spokesman. The FSA has said it will contest the BBA’s judicial review and that it expects banks to continue handling PPI complaints while the process is still ongoing. Campaigners are urging consumers who have considered complaining to act quickly. At present, the FSA is allowing them to continue seeking refunds, and the FOS is still hearing cases. “If you’ve put in a complaint and had an offer made, you should be safe,” said Lucy Widenka, personal finance campaigner for Which?. “We urge anyone affected to take action as soon as possible.” The concern is that if the courts were to rule in favour of the BBA and the banks, securing compensation could become difficult once again. The FSA said it expected firms to continue to handle complaints, but Lloyds is suspending its current cases. A spokeswoman for Lloyds said: “We will stand by any settlements that have already been made. The court case will not affect those offers. However, we are putting PPI sales-related claims on hold while we talk to the FSA. We hope this will only be for a few weeks.” It added that customers can still lodge complaints in the normal way. FURY AT 'RIDICULOUS WAR ON CONSUMERS' According to recent Financial Services Authority figures, in the last five years there have been more than a million complaints made to firms about payment protection insurance. Figures also show that in 2009-10 customers referred 49,196 complaints to the Ombudsman which then upheld nine out of 10 in the complainants’ favour. “It makes you wonder what planet the banks are living on,” said Which? chief executive Peter Vicary-Smith. “Not content with the billions they have made from this over-priced, flawed and frequently mis-sold product, the banks now seem to be trying to wriggle out of implementing changes that would ensure consumers are treated fairly. “The British Bankers’ Association’s taxpayer-backed members should take a long, hard look at themselves and ask why they continue to wage this ridiculous war on consumers.” Which? has set up a free online complaints service for consumers to make their complaint: http://www.which.co.uk/ppiclaim.

Article on banks refusing to process claims for PPI until result of judicial review. Santander buck the trend. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1320011/Banks-court-fight-PPI-claims.html?ito=feeds-newsxml Banks go to court to fight PPI claims By JAMES CONEY Last updated at 1:23 AM on 13th October 2010 Comments (0) Add to My Stories Thousands of borrowers sold rip-off payment protection insurance (PPI) will have their claims put on ice, Money Mail understands. It follows a High Court bid by the banks to overturn rules by the City watchdog that could lead to hundreds of thousands of pounds in refunds. Banks will put on hold any complaints which relate to this legal case. This is likely to mean anyone complaining about how they were sold PPI will have to wait until the court case is resolved; other complaints will be dealt with as normal. PPI payment: The FSA has proposed new rules which could lead to compensation for hundreds of thousands of customers But, at the same time, Santander has become an unlikely consumer champion and has declared it does not support the legal action started by trade body the British Bankers' Association (BBA). The City watchdog Financial Services Authority (FSA) has proposed new rules which could lead to compensation for hundreds of thousands of customers whose complaints about payment protection insurance (PPI) have been rejected. But the BBA believes the demands are illegal and wants them investigated by a judge. More... Do I need to agree to PPI to get a loan? {thisismoney.co.uk} End looms for PPI as Lloyds ends sales {thisismoney.co.uk} Mortgage rates are dropping as lenders compete in shrinking market Among those supporting the BBA's legal bid are state-backed Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group. An estimated 300,000 borrowers who were missold PPI - a type of insurance sold with loans and credit cards - are being fobbed off by the banks every year. Some of Britain's biggest banks have had to refund millions of pounds in premiums to consumers. Around eight in every ten complaints about the insurance is upheld by the independent Financial Ombusdman Service. A spokesman for the BBA says: 'It has unfortunately been necessary to do this because there is insufficient legal clarity about what the FSA and ombudsman are proposing. No one wants to go to court but the law needs to be clear.' To complain about your State-backed bank taking part in this legal action, call RBS on 0800 0150319, and Lloyds on 01733 387599. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1320011/Banks-court-fight-PPI-claims.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#ixzz12DBHP8B6

Hi silky You need to contact a member of the site team. Use this link, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/index.php go to bottom of page to check who is online. Site team members are in orange, click on one of the site team usernames. Simply ask them and let them know why you would like it changed. Its not usually a problem at all, and can easily be done. Best of luck.

Interesting article this on new powers for the FSA which ironically come into play today: (for some reason FSA site down at present) http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/fsa-gains-collective-redress-powers/a439181 FSA gains collective redress powers by Iain Martin on Oct 12, 2010 at 15:43 The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has been granted the power to force businesses to establish collective redress schemes to compensate consumers and publicise enforcement actions earlier. The power was created by the Financial Services Act 2010 and activated today along with others changes to the regulator. The FSA will use collective redress schemes where there is evidence of widespread failings following large numbers of claims made to the Financial Ombudsman Service over issues like Payment Protection Insurance. ‘This is an important new tool for the FSA, which increases our ability to get redress for consumers when firms have not followed our rules,’ said Sally Dewar (pictured), managing director of risk at the FSA. ‘The power would obviously be used proportionately. It is not a substitute for working with industry where there is the potential to bring an issue to a fair and speedy conclusion.’ The FSA has also acquired the power to publish decision notices ahead of final notices, which means that it can publicise enforcement actions rather than waiting for the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal to process appeals. The Financial Services Act 2010 also removes the FSA’s statutory objective to promote public understanding of the financial system following the establishment of the Consumer Financial and Education Body.

Banks drag their feet on protection insurance Bankers slammed over PPI attitude article on Which http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/10/banks-drag-their-feet-on-protection-insurance-233300/ cracking quote from their Chief Exec Banks drag their feet on protection insurance Bankers slammed over PPI attitude 11 October 2010 The Financial Services Authority (FSA) will contest the British Bankers’ Association’s (BBA) judicial review of the payment protection insurance (PPI) complaints handling measures. Which? chief executive Peter Vicary-Smith has criticised BBA for its support of a product that has been consistently mis-sold over the years. The Financial Ombudsman Services (FOS) has recorded thousands of complaints relating to PPI. It is a major campaigning area for Which?. The PPI problem Banks will be expected to continue handling complaints while the complaints process is in progress. If customers don’t think their complaint has been handled properly, they can refer it to the FOS. There have been more than a million PPI complaints over the last five years. In 2009/2010, the FOS received 49,196 complaints. Nine in ten were found to be in favour of those making the complaint. The FSA believes that the package of new complaint handling measures outlined in its policy statement is a 'sensible and fair solution for consumers and the industry alike'. Which? acts on PPI Peter Vicary-Smith said: ‘It makes you wonder what planet the banks are living on. Not content with the billions they have made from this overpriced, flawed and frequently mis-sold product, the banks now seem to be trying to wriggle out of implementing changes that would ensure consumers are treated fairly. The BBA's taxpayer-backed members should take a long, hard look at themselves and ask why they continue to wage this ridiculous war on consumers.

Hi Heatman what stage is your claim with Barclays at? Have they confirmed they will not process your claim in writing? If not, I suggest you get confirmation in writing ans then proceed to FOS. Remember that will take time. However, I think its important to get it lodged there quickly if thats what you have been told. Hopefully, this will be resolved quickly and in claimants favour. However, nothing would surprise me now. Good luck and keep us posted.

Banks fight FSA crackdown on PPI Basically states Lloyds have stopped processing, during the challenge, and other banks are expected to follow. All of this goes against FSA jurisdiction. Quite amazing and shows us, if we were ever in any doubt, what the banks think of regulation, the law and their customers. Financial Times http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/8ec1da2c-d623-11df-81f0-00144feabdc0.html

Suzie I take it you have a good relationship with your GP. I would have a confidential word with your doctor about this and stress the fact you are worried about it. As you have checked the policy, you don't have anything to worry about. You don't need the worry about that when the priority is your health and focusing on that and your return to fighting fitness. Very best of luck to you. Please keep us up to date.

Article from todays Telegraph regarding Lloyds group decision to place PPI claims on hold until after the review. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/insurance/incomeprotection/8059528/Lloyds-snubs-FSA-as-it-puts-PPI-claims-on-hold.html Lloyds snubs FSA as it puts PPI claims on hold Lloyds Banking Group, Britain's biggest bank, has collided head-on with the regulator by putting all customer complaints about mis-sold payment protection insurance (PPI) on hold until a forthcoming judicial review is heard. By Emma Simon Published: 4:04PM BST 12 Oct 2010 1 Comment The Financial Services Authority has reiterated that it expects all banks to continue handling customer complaints while the inquiry is under way. But other banks are expected to follow Lloyds' lead. One bank employee admitted: "We haven't quite pulled the ladder up yet on these complaints, but it isn't exactly business as usual either." Barclays confirmed that it was reviewing its PPI complaints handling process, while HSBC and Royal Bank of Scotland said discussions were under way between the British Bankers' Association (BBA) and the FSA on how PPI complaints should be dealt with in the interim. Santander said it would continue to deal with all PPI complaints. These moves follow the decision by the BBA to seek a review of new FSA rules on how banks deal with PPI complaints. These rules, due to come into effect on December 1, would force banks to review millions of older PPI cases against new standards, which are designed to put a stop to highly pressurised sales. According to Martin Lewis of Moneysavingexpert.com, these reviews could lead to compensation for up to 3m customers, costing some £2bn. In a statement, Lloyds Banking Group – which includes the Halifax and Bank of Scotland brands – said: "While we wish to resolve all complaints quickly, it is now very difficult to know exactly how to handle a PPI sales-related complaint. "Since the court challenge by the BBA is likely to take some time to come to a conclusion, the BBA is talking urgently with the FSA and Financial Ombudsman Service about how best to handle complaints during this period. We hope that they will be able to come to an agreed position soon." A spokesman added that customers could still log complaints about PPI, but they were unlikely to be resolved until the judicial review was complete. The review is not expected to be heard until April at the earliest. But it is not expected that the FSA will grant a "waiver", effectively allowing all banks to "freeze" complaints, as happened when there was court action pending over the legality of unauthorised bank charges. At the time it was agreed that such charges were a legal grey over, with no precedent set by either the courts or an Ombudsman's test case. In contrast, there have been numerous investigations, directives, guidelines and enforcement actions surrounding the sale of PPI, the first of which was in 2006. The FSA has taken action against 24 companies over PPI failings, and there have been more than 1m mis-selling complaints. A spokesman for the FSA said any bank customer who believed their complaint was not being handled correctly would be free to take it to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Recent figures published by the FOS show that it upheld more than 80pc of customers' complaints about mis-sold payment protection insurance. PPI has been routinely sold alongside loans and credit cards, offering to protect repayments if the borrower is unable to work. However, while the banks earned substantial commission payments for selling these policies, many failed to explain the small print, which meant that some buyers would never have been able to make a valid claim. In addition, premiums were often bundled into the cost of the loan, making it difficult for customers to compare costs properly. If you have a claim in with your bank and they now say they have stopped processing it, get that in writing and immediately lodge a complaint with the Financial Ombudsman Service. DON'T WAIT FOR THE 8 WEEK COMPLAINT TIME LIMIT. If you have a letter from them offering a settlement figure and they subsequently decide not to pay out, immediately proceed to FOS, with copies of all correspondence. If you are submitting a new claim and they subsequently inform you they will not deal with it, get it in wring and proceed to FOS. DON'T WAIT FOR THE 8 WEEK COMPLAINT TIME LIMIT. You have the option of taking any complaint to FOS after the 8 week period but remember claims take a long time for investigation at FOS and time for subsequent payout by the bank due to their delay tactics.

Whilst there appears to be feedback that some banks/ financial institutions may have instructed their staff that PPI claims are on hold in view of the BBA's decision to challenge the FSA, the advice is to continue to complain if you feel you have been mis-sold PPI and pursue a claim for a refund. Those institutions may have been a bit hasty with that stance. No waivers have been granted by the FSA to any seller of PPI and the FSA continue to expect all complaints submitted to financial institutions regulated by them to be processed in accordance with their guidance. If you have difficulties, then after 8 weeks you can submit your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service who require to investigate on your behalf. Please post if you experience difficulties and CAG will continue to assist and monitor the situation.

FSA advises consumers to keep complaining if you were mis-sold PPI. From the Financial Services Authority http://www.fsa.gov.uk/Pages/consumerinformation/product_news/insurance/payment_protection_insurance_/ppi_changes/index.shtml PPI changes challenged: Can you still complain? If you have insurance to cover your loan or debt repayments in the event of accident, sickness, reduced income or loss of employment, you can still complain about how the policy was sold to you or the response you received after making a claim. Find out how. If you have taken out a loan, mortgage or credit card, you may have been sold payment protection insurance (PPI) to cover the repayments if you are unable to meet them in certain circumstances. These policies can also be called loan protection, credit protection, or accident, sickness and unemployment insurance. It may have been suggested to you that you needed PPI to be approved for a loan or credit, or even had a policy added to the amount of your loan without your knowledge, increasing the balance you have to repay. Consumer protection challenged We took over the regulation of insurance sales in 2005, and since then have found evidence of widespread problems with the sale of PPI and how complaints are handled. To ensure customers are treated more fairly when complaining about the sale of a PPI policy or after making a claim, we announced a package of measures for firms to follow by 1 December 2010. These measures include: ensuring firms handle complaints properly and offer redress where appropriate; explaining when and why firms should review past complaints to identify if there are serious flaws in sales practices that may have affected customers who bought PPI; and setting out common sales failings to help firms identify bad practice. What’s happened now The banking industry, through trade association the British Bankers' Association (BBA), started legal proceedings on 8 October 2010 to challenge our ability to insist on these measures. We intend to contest this challenge as we consider the measures to be a fair solution for consumers and the industry. What to do if you have a complaint Despite the challenge by the BBA, you still have the right to complain about your PPI policy. If you have a complaint about the circumstances of the sale of your PPI policy or the suitability of the product for you, you should first complain to the firm that sold it to you. If your complaint is about a claim you have made, you should raise the matter with the insurance firm. You are more likely to get a prompt response if you follow the firm’s complaints procedure – you can check online or call to confirm how they prefer you to proceed. The firm then has eight weeks to look into your complaint and provide a response. If you are not happy with how the firm has dealt with your complaint you can take it to the Financial Ombudsman Service as soon as possible and within six months of receiving a response. The ombudsman service is a free, independent service for settling disputes between financial services firms and their customers. The ombudsman service has a template to register a complaint about PPI which you can send to the firm that sold you the policy. Find out more about what to do if you have a dispute or complaint. Fairness failings We have taken action against 24 firms for failings in PPI sales since 2005, with fines totalling nearly £13m. We also stopped the sale of single premium PPI with unsecured personal loans so consumers won’t pay upfront for several years of protection. The quality of complaints handling is another area of PPI we have focused on. In the past five years there have been over a million complaints made about PPI. Firms on average reject around half the PPI complaints they receive, but some reject nearly all the complaints, according to figures we received from 18 major sellers of PPI. Nearly one-third of rejected complainants go to the ombudsman service, where more than 80% are overturned in the consumer’s favour.

From BBA web site. http://www.bba.org.uk/media/article/ppi-factsheet Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) 11/10/10 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. I have lodged a mis-selling complaint with my bank. What will happen to this complaint? The banks are currently discussing with the FSA how best to handle complaints whilst the judicial review is ongoing. 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. Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) Factsheet Print this article Bookmark

Following Patricks advice, I am now ripping up my letter and will use the standardised claim process and forms which the Financial Ombudsman Service have produced and made available http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi.html. That seems like an incredibly straightforward process.

Many thanks Patrick!!!!!!!!!

Nice to see you big mac- hope you are well!!! Best wishes, Kenny

Issues I will encounter are: PPI claim dates from 2000, way to old- but we know better. Central Capital Ltd were not regulated by FSA at time. They appear to have been self regulated by FISA- Financial Industry Standards Association. Lack of paperwork, files, telephone recordings etc I was aware of policy and implications and entered into it willingly. A blank no and refusal to answer further correspondence.

This post will be developed to calculate the potential refund, and I will be grateful for help. I will link to the interest calculator. A refund of PPI amounting to £700 has been made to me by Endeavour for early settlement, so I can't claim for that. The PPI amount to be reclaimed is £2936.

Round 2 of PPI reclaim. This time it will not be so easy, having read threads on CAG, before posting this. However, I hope I can pick up on some of the issues others had difficulty with, and hopefully, give others who have had PPI policies with these companies a helping hand. Fortunately, I have a lot of information to go on, as a result of SAR requests related to past bank charge reclaims. Story so far: Central Trust PLC arranged a joint secured loan during December 2000. They arranged this loan with Endeavour Personal Finance Ltd, an HSBC company, based iat Beneficial House, Easthampstead Rd, Bracknell, RG12 1NS. Loan Details Advance, £14,000 PPI single payment policy £3640 Total £17,640 APR 12.9% I had pursued Endeavour regarding the mis-selling of PPI and they said that Central Capital Ltd are responsible for the PPI sale and any reclaim, which I kind of accept. I have the Credit agreement- an actual original- which is a first for me. I have a record of all transactions on the account and the account no which is settled in full and never defaulted- no issues there. The account settled during mid 2003. The following letter has today been drafted and sent to Central Capital Ltd, based on my letter in another PPI thread, kennythecelt V Bank of Scotland Credit Care Bronze: Central Capital Ltd xxxxxx 2010 The Complaints Department Melton House 65-67 Clarendon Rd Watford Herts WD17 1BL Dear Sir/Madam, Mr and Mrs kennythecelt Present Address for correspondence: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Previous Address of Account: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Your group of companies ie Central Trust PLC and Debtbuster Loans, acted as a credit broker for ourselves and arranged a secured loan with Endeavour Personal Finance. The loan and account details are as follows: Loan amount: £14,000 Single sum payment protection insurance policy: £3,640, Total loan amount: £17,640 APR: 12.9% Repayment period: 120 months Advance date: xxxxxxx Settlement date: xxxxxxxx Account No: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx A copy of the credit agreement with Endeavour Personal Finance is attached for your information. I also attach a copy of the historical transactions on the account with Endeavour Personal Finance, for your information, which I have received from them. I believe I have been mis-sold a payment protection insurance policy (PPI), by you and I would like to request a full refund of my premiums, plus interest that I paid on that sum ie 12.9% plus compensatory interest at 8%. This loan has since been repaid in full by me, before the due settlement date. I have been in contact with Endeavour Personal Finance regarding the mis-selling of PPI and they have referred me to you. I do not believe being forced to buy this policy as part of the loan was a fair and reasonable obligation upon me as I did not need this insurance and I did not want it. Please note that the reason you arranged this loan on our behalf was to consolidate our finances. This means that you would be aware that I had financial difficulties at the time and could therefore not afford the luxury of a worthless Payment Protection Insurance policy paid up front with interest at 12.9% added for the privilege. The policy was mis-sold to me because: • It was sold as a condition of the loan being made available to me. • I had pre existing medical conditions which would have meant that I would not have been able to make a claim for those conditions. In effect, the policy was useless to me. • I did not see the policy in advance of signing the agreement to make myself aware of its terms and conditions, as you did not make me aware of them. In fact, I don't recollect ever seeing a full policy document and have no idea who you arranged this policy with- perhaps you can supply a copy of the terms and conditions of the policy document. • The policy was a lump sum prepaid policy and I had to pay you interest for that policy for the period of the loan. This was not explained to me. I was also not given the cheaper option of a monthly PPI policy, which would not have accrued interest over the duration of the policy and which would have been easier to cancel. It is not easy to cancel a prepaid policy as it is paid up front. The FSA has recommended the end of single payment PPI policies due to the number of instances of mis-selling. • The monthly payments to Endeavour Personal Finance would have been considerably less and more manageable to me, if I was not sold the policy and related interest and instead sold a monthly policy. • I was not asked by you if I had other insurances/ policies or financial measures in place which could provide me with cover if I needed it or the means to repay the loan amount. • I was not offered a choice of market placed products, but directed to a policy which you provided me with. Presumably, you had a business interest for doing so and I would like to know what this was please. • You did not take steps to ensure that the policy was in my/ our best interests. You did not make a comparison of products for my individual circumstances. • You did not inform me that you would make commission from the sale of the policy to me or what the commission was. Can you please tell me commission you received. • At the time of entering into the agreement with you, I was employed by xxxxxxxxxx Council as was my wife. You were aware of these facts as you sought references to process the loan and PPI. As we were employed in Local Authorities, in the event that we had an illness during the period of the loan and PPI policy, both my wife and I would have been provided with sickness pay for a 12 month period (6 months at full pay) which was better than the policy you provided me with. We also had superannuation scheme membership. • At the time of the policy being sold to me, we were at no risk of redundancy as we were employed in local government. The only type of redundancy would have been voluntary and the terms of voluntary redundancy would have been very favourable and enough to repay the loan. Consequently the PPI policy you sold me as a condition of the loan was worthless. • I believe that you have recently reviewed your policy on sales of PPI due to recommendations from the FSA due to complaints about circumstances such as mine. • These policies were recommended to clients such as me by your sales staff who were on commission as part of their salary and conditions of service and I was not made aware of this by you or the salesperson, who I assumed to be a member of staff not motivated by sales but with my best interest at heart, as a consumer. I now respectfully ask that you investigate the selling of the policy to me and make arrangements for full repayment of the policy amount and all interest on the policy (at fixed rate of 12.9%) that I have paid to you until the loan was settled. In addition to that sum, I require interest at 8% on the combined sum above, from the date of the loan agreement and PPI until you settle this claim with me. If I do not receive a favourable response from you I will pursue this claim through the Financial Ombudsman Service and I am prepared to seek legal redress, for which I would claim costs and time in full. I appreciate that you will claim a lack of available data, but, I have supplied these to you, to help you make your enquiries. I expect this issue to be resolved within 14 days please. Yours sincerely Mr and Mrs kennythecelt

RESULT: SUCCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! UPDATE- VICTORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Today I received a telephone call in relation to my PPI request from HBOS (based on an earlier post, above) which asked me to confirm security details ie DOB and post code (for claimants knowledge of procedure- i hate it when they phone me about MY account and ask me to confirm my details,................... but. there you go!!). Today, I was phoned by Halifax/ Bank of Scotland/ HBOS and I was offered a refund of £3,817 in settlement of my claim. I have accepted verbally my claim subject to confirmation in writing from them. HBOS confirmed my offer verbally and said subject to 8%.Is this correct????? (I have not checked the figure, perhaps someone else will- crap at spreadsheet calculations!!). I was asked for details for the cheque to be paid to me- which will be in our joint names- MY WIFE IS MORE IMPORTANT THEN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!. This is important for all PPI Claimants: My reclaim PPI lettter to HBOS/ BOSW/ BOS, only submitted on 23 August 2010 has produced results only 8 days later!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's only EIGHT (8) DAYS for a PPI Payout- IS THIS A RECORD??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Use the letter above and delete or amend as appropriate. This is for illustration purposes only. If your circumstances are similar to mine, for HBOS group of companies only, please amend the above process, to allow for your own circumstances. The above is offered to help Consumer Action (CAG) members only and other readers of CAG above to help other claimants on CAG, Consumer Action Group - the beszt best place ever!!!!!! . I had absolutely no account details of other accounts- even though I have isssued several SAR requests to HBOS and was not even aware of PPI on another account). Today , I was also told that they have also investigated another loan,from 2001 ??, which had PPI- 9 YEARS AGO. They have also confirmed that they will refund an additional £1,500, plus 8% interest- what does that equate to?????) Apparently, this "additional" account relates to a consolidation loan (no surprise there, are there any more??!!), (check my previous posts to see what the bank charge position was). Of note to all PPI Claimants- get it back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CLAIM NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have said above and confirm today that I will donate CAG 20 % of my refund once its in my account. Please do the same!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What do you get if you successfully crawl under a cow? A pat on the head!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11053202 The top 10 festival funnies were judged to be: (BTW not so funny nor PC) 1) Tim Vine "I've just been on a once-in-a-lifetime holiday. I'll tell you what, never again." 2) David Gibson "I'm currently dating a couple of anorexics. Two birds, one stone." 3) Emo Philips "I picked up a hitch hiker. You've got to when you hit them." 4) Jack Whitehall "I bought one of those anti-bullying wristbands when they first came out. I say 'bought', I actually stole it off a short, fat ginger kid." 5) Gary Delaney "As a kid I was made to walk the plank. We couldn't afford a dog." 6) John Bishop "Being an England supporter is like being the over-optimistic parents of the fat kid on sports day." 7) Bo Burnham "What do you call a kid with no arms and an eyepatch? Names." 8) Gary Delaney "Dave drowned. So at the funeral we got him a wreath in the shape of a lifebelt. Well, it's what he would have wanted." 9) Robert White "For Vanessa Feltz, life is like a box of chocolates: Empty." 10) Gareth Richards "Wooden spoons are great. You can either use them to prepare food. Or, if you can't be bothered with that, just write a number on one and walk into a pub…" Come on lets hear your funnies.

Hi Pisces sorry but we cannot make the statements out. They are very unclear. Yes you can reclaim the late payment fees, returned direct debit fees etc.