Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'trigger'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location

Found 3 results

  1. If a couple have a joint JSA claim and the one who doesn't sign on (i.e not the lead claimant) goes abroad for a few weeks does this trigger migration to UC, either on leaving or returning?
  2. Hi, the area I live in is due to go from live-service to full-service UC in April of next year, which is roughly when I'm due for reassessment of ESA. I'm in the Support Group right now. Am I right in thinking I will stay on ESA if I pass the WCA with the right points, and won't move onto Universal Credit? Thanks
  3. Banks could face even bigger bills for mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance after the City watchdog said it was considering new rules following a landmark legal decision. In November last year, the Supreme Court said that Paragon Personal Finance, a secured loans company, had breached the Consumer Credit Act by failing to disclose that the PPI premium paid by a customer included a hefty commission fee to a credit broker. This means that even if the loan insurance was otherwise fairly sold, banks could be liable for mis-selling compensation if PPI was bought via a broker. On Wednesday, the FCA said the judgement in the case, Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance, may mean new rules on dealing with complaints, potentially opening the door for more compensation. “The FCA is considering whether additional rules and/or guidance are required to deal with the impact of the Plevin decision on complaints about PPI,” it said. “The FCA will be engaging with relevant stakeholders in the coming months in respect of this and it expects to announce its views on this, including next steps, at the same time as existing work.” The regulator is considering revamping the PPI rulebook, saying it wants to “meet its objectives of securing appropriate protection for consumers and enhancing the integrity of the UK’s financial system”. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11633767/Legal-ruling-could-pave-way-for-new-wave-of-PPI-claims.html PPI ruling may trigger a landslide of fresh mis-selling claims The City Watchdog could be forced to introduce new rules around PPI mis-selling complaints following a landmark court ruling. It could open the door to a landslide of fresh claims for compensation, even for those who have already been paid out for being flogged the often useless and expensive insurance. The latest wrinkle to the scandal – which has already cost Britain’s banks an estimated £24 billion – centres on commission payments to lenders and advisers. In November, the Supreme Court ruled in the Plevin v Paragon case that failing to disclose commission made the relationship between lender and borrower unfair. Susan Plevin, a 59-year old college lecturer, was charged £5,780 as an upfront PPI premium on a £39,870 loan. But almost three-quarters – 71.8% – of the premium was commission, with credit broker LLP Processing receiving £1,870 and lender Paragon getting £2,280. Plevin was not told about the commission and took proceedings against the two firms in 2009 for mis-selling because the policy was useless for her, but also on the basis that the PPI agreement was unfair because of the non-disclosure of the commissions. The Supreme Court’s Lord Sumption ruled that failing to disclose commissions led to a “sufficiently extreme inequality of knowledge and understanding”. http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/ppi-ruling-may-trigger-a-landslide-of-fresh-misselling-claims-10277984.html
×
×
  • Create New...