Jump to content


POC for PPI - Do we have any?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3886 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

I was just wondering if we have any Particulars of Claim for PPIs? I know that quite a number of us have won our claims but would anyone like to share their POC content?

 

I'm claiming against Blackhorse for a secured loan.

 

Thanks:).

Mint - Won! WCO not granted by court. :)

BlackHorse Loan- Won! WCO not granted. :)

 

Easy Money & More Than (Lloyds) - Won! Had been offered half of settlement prior but declined. :)

 

Capital One - Won! :)

 

BlackHorse PPI- WON £3,000, Claimed 4,500! :)

 

CitiFinancial - WON! :)

 

****************************************************************************

 

Monument - N1 Submitted Feb09

Cahoot - N1 submitted Feb09

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the difficulty is that the circumstances of each claim are somewhat different. Certainly it would be helpful if people would post their POC's when the feel it is appropriate to do so, and I am happy to sticky this thread if that is how it develops.

 

When I can, I will post mine also. However, some of the arguments I am using are potentially ground-breaking, and I would rather not show all my cards to Robinson Way until they have revealed at least some of theirs. ;)

Alan, Derby, UK.

 

 

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Sorry, but I cannot deal with your case by PM - please ask questions in your own thread. If you do not get a reply within 48 hours send a PM, with a link to the relevant thread, to any Site Team Member.

 

DO NOT SEND QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR CLAIM TO ADMIN, or our WEBMASTER - YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE A REPLY.

 

Advice given is purely my opinion, and is not based on any legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ps: I found one by Tonycee & Barclays PPI.

Mint - Won! WCO not granted by court. :)

BlackHorse Loan- Won! WCO not granted. :)

 

Easy Money & More Than (Lloyds) - Won! Had been offered half of settlement prior but declined. :)

 

Capital One - Won! :)

 

BlackHorse PPI- WON £3,000, Claimed 4,500! :)

 

CitiFinancial - WON! :)

 

****************************************************************************

 

Monument - N1 Submitted Feb09

Cahoot - N1 submitted Feb09

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Miissy06.

Please post up and ask if your version of this

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1112662.html looks ok before you proceed.

As welcome as you are to use it, and i wish you all the best, i havent actually submitted my POC yet, and dont know if its the best POC for anybody.

Good Luck.

I Wish you everything you wish yourself.

 

NatWest Claimed £1,639. Accepted £1,344.

Natwest Paid me again as GOGW £1,656. Yes they can have it back if they say please.

Barclays 1 Claimed £1,260. Won by default. Paid in full

Barclays 2 Claimed £2,378. Won by default. Paid in full

Birmingham Midshires. Claimed £2,122. Accepted £2,075.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Subscribing as I will either have or need some soon for more than one case.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - I've just asked a similar question on my own thread v Halifax. Preparing mine to go to court against the Hellifax early in the New Year (after Xmas spending is out of the way and I can actually afford the Court fees!).

 

Will post mine once completed.

Bank and credit card reclaims - £9,806

Sainsburys CCA non-compliance with FOS;

Natwest reclaim of £340 in progress;

Egg credit card reclaim in progress

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay....I have now reworked my POC's as a template however, please be warned that you will need to adapt them to suit your own situation.

 

Claims of this nature cannot be done through Moneyclaim, and I would therefore suggest that you attach your POC's to the claim rather than try to fit them into the box on page two of the N1. Remember to sign both the form, and the attached POC's.

 

The document is laid out in court format, which I do believe helps to put over the fact that you know what you are doing.

 

All the legal arguments are available via the stickies - but, as always, if you are in any doubt whatsoever about your claim, you should you should seek proper legal advice before embarking on legal action:

 

Draft POC Template

Alan, Derby, UK.

 

 

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

 

Sorry, but I cannot deal with your case by PM - please ask questions in your own thread. If you do not get a reply within 48 hours send a PM, with a link to the relevant thread, to any Site Team Member.

 

DO NOT SEND QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR CLAIM TO ADMIN, or our WEBMASTER - YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE A REPLY.

 

Advice given is purely my opinion, and is not based on any legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alanfromderby,

 

that's great! Thanks......although I handed my PPI claim yesterday using the Tonycee & Barclays PPI draft which is not as detailed as yours...:sad:

 

What I'll do is add your bits to my bundle (if it comes to that) later on down the line........

Mint - Won! WCO not granted by court. :)

BlackHorse Loan- Won! WCO not granted. :)

 

Easy Money & More Than (Lloyds) - Won! Had been offered half of settlement prior but declined. :)

 

Capital One - Won! :)

 

BlackHorse PPI- WON £3,000, Claimed 4,500! :)

 

CitiFinancial - WON! :)

 

****************************************************************************

 

Monument - N1 Submitted Feb09

Cahoot - N1 submitted Feb09

Link to post
Share on other sites

ps: thanks for making this a sticky! We'll definitely need this to strengthen our PPI claims going forward.

 

Have a great christmas all!

Mint - Won! WCO not granted by court. :)

BlackHorse Loan- Won! WCO not granted. :)

 

Easy Money & More Than (Lloyds) - Won! Had been offered half of settlement prior but declined. :)

 

Capital One - Won! :)

 

BlackHorse PPI- WON £3,000, Claimed 4,500! :)

 

CitiFinancial - WON! :)

 

****************************************************************************

 

Monument - N1 Submitted Feb09

Cahoot - N1 submitted Feb09

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks for this Alan ... I'll be using it as the basis for my first PPI claim and will be re-wording it as appropriate to reflect my personal circumstances.

 

x x

'Fortune favours the brave.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any advice given is purely on the basis of my own views and opinions and offered in good faith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My N1 form was returned by the court last week as I'd only sent it 1 copy and they required 2!

 

This turned out to be a blessing in disguise as I've been able to use Alan's detailed POC instead (I'd used Tonycee's originally)!

 

Dropped off the N1 with revised POC at the court yesterday.......with a cost of 105.00 in fees!:x

Mint - Won! WCO not granted by court. :)

BlackHorse Loan- Won! WCO not granted. :)

 

Easy Money & More Than (Lloyds) - Won! Had been offered half of settlement prior but declined. :)

 

Capital One - Won! :)

 

BlackHorse PPI- WON £3,000, Claimed 4,500! :)

 

CitiFinancial - WON! :)

 

****************************************************************************

 

Monument - N1 Submitted Feb09

Cahoot - N1 submitted Feb09

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Okay....I have now reworked my POC's as a template however, please be warned that you will need to adapt them to suit your own situation.

 

Claims of this nature cannot be done through Moneyclaim, and I would therefore suggest that you attach your POC's to the claim rather than try to fit them into the box on page two of the N1. Remember to sign both the form, and the attached POC's.

 

The document is laid out in court format, which I do believe helps to put over the fact that you know what you are doing.

 

All the legal arguments are available via the stickies - but, as always, if you are in any doubt whatsoever about your claim, you should you should seek proper legal advice before embarking on legal action:

 

Draft POC Template

 

alan, could this POC, be adapted for mortgage/loan guard PPI?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

This POC will be used in my claim against Egg for repayment of missold credit card repayment protector / CCRP/(PPI).

My main argument is that they didn't tell me I could get this insurance elsewhere or that I would end up paying interest on it.

 

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

 

 

1. The Claimant had a credit agreement, credit card number xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ("the Agreement") with the Defendant which was opened on or around July 2002.

 

2. At the time of opening the account the Defendant misled the Claimant into procuring Payment Protection Insurance ("the Insurance") as part of the overall credit bargain.

 

3. The Claimant contends that:

a) The Insurance imposed upon the Claimant were neither defined nor explained, nor alternatives from other suppliers suggested.

b) The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

 

 

4. Accordingly the Claimant asks:

 

a) The Court finds that the Defendant acted in a way grossly contravening ordinary principles of fair dealing and reopens the credit bargain to perform restitution to rectify the unjust enrichment performed, to the detriment of the Claimant by the sum of £1641.91 by conferring a benefit under an ineffective transaction.

 

b) If the Court is unable to perform restitution, then the Claimant seeks damages of £1641.91 by virtue of the Defendants’ actions, be they fraudulently or mistakenly, in obtaining the Insurances.

 

c) Alternatively, the Claimant seeks damages of £1641.91 in regards to the Defendants clear breach of the Claimants human rights as prescribed by Article 1 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act 1998 whereby the Defendants actions did cause the Claimant to suffer personal loss to the sum of £1641.91

 

d) Court costs;

 

e) The Claimant claims

 

i) Compound interest on the charges applied thereon to the Claimant’s account (“the principal claim”), at the annual rate of

22.9 %. This is the rate applied by the Defendant to the Claimant’s unauthorised use or borrowing of the Defendant’s monies, as provided for in the contract.

 

The Claimant’s case for claiming this rate is based in equity, and a legal requirement for fairness and balance.

 

The Claimant deems the Defendant’s principal indebtedness to the claimant to be unauthorised, since it is comprised of insurance charges that were imposed upon the Claimant, they were not explained and were in fact mis-sold, not advising the Claimant that alternative products were available elsewhere.

 

ii) In the alternative to e i), if the Court is unable to agree that the claimant is entitled to the contractual rates of interest, on the grounds stated, the Claimant avers that the defendant would be unjustly enriched if the Claimant’s entitlement was limited to the statutory rate of interest in that the defendant has had use of the sums and would have used these sums to re-lend at commercially compounded rates. On these grounds the Claimant seeks restitution of the compounded contractual interest at the defendant’s authorised borrowing rate of 22.9 % per annum.

 

iii) In the alternative to e i) and ii), if the Court finds that the Claimant is not entitled to contractual interest, the Claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984.

iv)Schedule showing interest calculated at the rate quoted at I is attached to these particulars of claim, as follows:

 

Schedule A - Compound Contractual Interest calculated at 22.9%.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine has been submitted at Newcastle County Court against the Halifax - will publish it for people's reference as and when the case settles. (I'm keeping it up my sleeve to give them a nice wee surprise!)

Bank and credit card reclaims - £9,806

Sainsburys CCA non-compliance with FOS;

Natwest reclaim of £340 in progress;

Egg credit card reclaim in progress

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

As a newbie, I am just preparing to issue a claim....any advice ...would you use MCOL or local court?

I notice the MCOL only gives 1080 txt on up to just 24 lines.....I am having a job trying to fit it all in....anyone got template for this perhaps?

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

As a newbie, I am just preparing to issue a claim....any advice ...would you use MCOL or local court?

I notice the MCOL only gives 1080 txt on up to just 24 lines.....I am having a job trying to fit it all in....anyone got template for this perhaps?

Thanks in advance.

 

Hello Karinata,

 

Unfortunately there is no template poc for Mcol, you are best to use a N1, you will find one in the bank charges template letters, on the main page of the forum. Best to type up your poc, then copy and paste it to the N1, then print of I think 3 copies. Send two to the court, with your payment recoreded delivery.

 

Please take your time doing your poc, because once you send it, if you need to amend, add, it will cost your £35.

 

Good luck and if you need assistance, just ask:D

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , thanks for that, I think I will go along with the N1 form , do you think I could adapt the post above by Phatram for my poc as mine is similar reasons for mis-selling.

Loan was taken out back in 2002 before regulations, what do you think my chances are of getting a refund?

Thanks for your help :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
anyone?:confused:

Hi there I use this for my PPI claim....hope it can be of help to someone else, you may need to adapt bits.....

 

The Claimants took out a secured loan on xx/xx/xxxx via a telephone call to the Defendant.

Claimants were told that the PPI was absolutely necessary in order to proceed to obtain the associated credit.

The policy was not defined nor explained and not considered "optional".

At the time of undertaking the secured loan, the Claimants were misled into procuring Payment Protection Insurance as part of the overall credit.

This is in breach of CCCA 1974, where a company must be fit to be involved in activities the licence covers.

The policy was not needed or requested as Mr X's employers operate a policy of full pay for 12 months of sickness,death in service benefits, and in addition to this there was critical illness cover and life insurance already in place.

PPI only applied to 5 years rather than full term. This is also in breach of Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, where a term is unfair if “contrary to the requirement of good faith if it causes a significant imbalance in parties rights and obligations under the contract, to the detriment of consumers”.

There was over-reliance on information sent through the post, which again breaches CCA 1974 and is therefore negligent in line with 1967 Misrepresentation Act.

Under CPR18 claimant requests full documentary evidence of absolute compliance with best practise in sale of PPI and detailed record of training undertaken by staff.

The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX of £XXXX.XX and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £X.XX

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there I use this for my PPI claim....hope it can be of help to someone else, you may need to adapt bits.....

 

The Claimants took out a secured loan on xx/xx/xxxx via a telephone call to the Defendant.

Claimants were told that the PPI was absolutely necessary in order to proceed to obtain the associated credit.

The policy was not defined nor explained and not considered "optional".

At the time of undertaking the secured loan, the Claimants were misled into procuring Payment Protection Insurance as part of the overall credit.

This is in breach of CCCA 1974, where a company must be fit to be involved in activities the licence covers.

The policy was not needed or requested as Mr X's employers operate a policy of full pay for 12 months of sickness,death in service benefits, and in addition to this there was critical illness cover and life insurance already in place.

PPI only applied to 5 years rather than full term. This is also in breach of Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, where a term is unfair if “contrary to the requirement of good faith if it causes a significant imbalance in parties rights and obligations under the contract, to the detriment of consumers”.

There was over-reliance on information sent through the post, which again breaches CCA 1974 and is therefore negligent in line with 1967 Misrepresentation Act.

Under CPR18 claimant requests full documentary evidence of absolute compliance with best practise in sale of PPI and detailed record of training undertaken by staff.

The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA.

The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX of £XXXX.XX and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £X.XX

 

thanks karinata!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 1 month later...

"The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA."QUOTE

 

 

Would someone very clever mind explaining the above in simple english as I am sure I will need this POC shortly! Thanks

Any opinion I give is my own and given without

any liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Claimant further contends that if the Insurance was applied correctly, that the Agreement was not executed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

i) As the Insurance was in fact a charge for credit on the Conditional Sale Agreement, it could not also be part of the credit on the additional insurances agreement as under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit even where time is given for their payments

ii) If the Insurance was not a charge for credit in respect of the Conditional Sale Agreement, as it was compulsory, it was a charge for credit on the additional insurances and under section 9 (4) CCA credit charges cannot be treated as credit

iii) For the reasons stated in either (i) or (ii) above, the agreement for additional insurances failed to state the correct amount of credit and did not comply with paragraph 2, schedule 6, which requires that regulated agreements contain as a prescribed term stating the correct amount of credit

iv) The agreement for additional insurances was therefore improperly executed under section 61 (1)(a) of the CCA."QUOTE

 

 

Would someone very clever mind explaining the above in simple english as I am sure I will need this POC shortly! Thanks

 

Hello Basically it means that the agreement that state the ppi is as such

 

You loan say £20,000 over Ten years.

 

PPi costs £4.800

 

The then add them together and charge interest on the both over ten years at their interest rate.

 

So you find that they added £4,095 in interest alone for the ppi. So infact the ppi cost you over £9,000 for the privilige.

There is lots of useful information relating as to what is require to make an agreement properly excuted and enforceable under the cca.

 

Have a look at the thread agreement enforcebility from page five onwards:grin:

  • Haha 1

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal experiences. I have no legal training, but have educated myself in aspects of consumer legislation. My motto "NEVER GIVE IN, NEVER SURRENDER", THERE IS A WAR ON YOU KNOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Basically it means that the agreement that state the ppi is as such

 

You loan say £20,000 over Ten years.

 

PPi costs £4.800

 

The then add them together and charge interest on the both over ten years at their interest rate.

 

So you find that they added £4,095 in interest alone for the ppi. So infact the ppi cost you over £9,000 for the privilige.

There is lots of useful information relating as to what is require to make an agreement properly excuted and enforceable under the cca.

 

Have a look at the thread agreement enforcebility from page five onwards:grin:

 

Thanks for that,both my secured loans were set out like that.

Any opinion I give is my own and given without

any liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...