If info in these blogs is anything to go by,
I'm embroiled in typical delaying correspondence "ping-pong" with Natwest
but have just had a very aggressive telephone conversation with their rep.
most of the details of my claim are the usual suspects ie
didn't need it,
lack of info provided,
condition of loan etc.
but one other aspect is that ppi was added to my loan 8 months after it was taken out.
I have all the info and the documents prove that
1. I took out a £5000 loan in July 1997
2. £1125 ppi was added (that I had not agreed to)
3. I cancelled the ppi and this was deducted from the loan balance
4. In February 1998 a new loan was set up in my name to the value of £5530
5. The original loan was paid off in full with £4636.90 from the £5530 and closed.
These 5 events are not in dispute and are fully agreed.
Where the serious disagreement occurs is that Natwests position is that I "must have" applied for an additional loan of £900
(although they are yet to provide any evidence) and this is the "only logical explanation".
My assertion,however, is that Natwest said (at the time) that ppi had been a condition of my original loan
and should not have been cancelled so added it to the outstanding balance once they realised some 7 months later.
I also assert that at the time there was no reason for the requirement of an additional £900 loan
and that this was not credited to my account.
( I have asked for bank statement to prove this but none are available)
Natwests rep has just told me in no uncertain terms that "nobody will believe that we would do this"
and the Ombudsman won't believe it when there "is zero evidence this has happened to anyone else at any time"
I don't believe for one minute that my case is unique and know this will have happened to numerous others.
I would, therefore, appreciate hearing from anyone else who has similar experience or anyone who could give positive advice.