LTSB settled loans PPI - no response at all! ***WON***

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone:)

 

This is a new thread started to specifically deal with the PPI on two joint loans taken out by Mr Landy and myself. I have done this to save any confusion on my other thread re: PPI on LTSB settled loans which I will now use to concentrate solely on Mr Landy's individual loans.

 

Background info -

 

Mr Landy and I took out a loan with LTSB in 2003. We were told we had to have PPI or our application would be turned down.

 

Later that year we took out another loan with LTSB to consolidate the previous loan and borrow further. Again the sales broker insisted we had to take out the PPI. At this point the first loan was paid off and a rebate was received.

 

The second loan was repaid during 2004.

 

We only recently realised the PPI had been mis-sold for this and other reasons and contacted LTSB informing them of this.

 

We received no response despite sending our letter by recorded delivery, so we sent a sceond letter.

 

This also was not acknowledged by LTSB.

 

We sent a further letter, which once again was completely ignored.

 

8 weeks have passed since our first letter to Lloyds was received.

 

Yesterday we sent a formal complaint to the FSA and FOS and we will be sending further complaints to the OFT and BBA.

 

Today we filled out the FOS complaint forms and sent these with all available supporting evidence to the FOS to investigate.

 

It would appear from LTSB's refusal to even acknowledge our letters, that they are hoping we will give up and go away - we will not.

 

I will update this thread as further developments occur.

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[alanalana]

On board

 

aa

[pompeyfaith]

Hiya Landy,

 

I don't think the BBA will be off any help, they work for the banks not us mortal souls.

 

Subbed now anyway.

 

Regards

 

PF

[alanalana]

Hiya Landy,

 

I don't think the BBA will be off any help, they work for the banks not us mortal souls.

 

Subbed now anyway.

 

Regards

 

PF

 

You are of course correct with this PF. I wrote to the BBA about the RBS and got a response saying they were not a regulatory body just an instutuational organisation for the banks. Quite a polite response but in the end the RBS may be part of the organisation but it is in fact now owned 70% by the taxpayer, me and you. I would say dump the institute as it was for the banks by the banks and things have changed

 

I would vote as a shareholder in the RBS (surely I must be a shareholder as a taxpayer) for the RBS to withdraw as a member of the BBA. After all they are on the side of the banks and not the side of the consumer.

 

 

aa

[landy_alert]

Hi PF and aa:)

 

Right, I'll cross the BBA off my list of letters to send tomorrow then - it's one less I s'pose! I think I got the idea from your thread aa btw.

 

Cheers guys:D

[pompeyfaith]

no problem landy just dont want u wasting resourses and money on those cretins have u seen some of there interviews on tv PF

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone:)

 

Just updating this thread -

 

I received a reply to my complaint to the FSA about Lloyds behaviour in dealing with our PPI issues. They state that they have passed my complaint to the department that supervises LTSB because the issues I have raised may indicate wider concerns about their ability to meet the FSA's standards. I know the FSA cannot resolve my complaints but it feels good to know LTSB have been reported!

 

The complaints I filed with the FOS about the mis-sold PPI on the loans have now been acknowledged. I'm expecting a long wait to get these matters resolved but the wheels are in motion and LTSB will hopefully now realise we are not a pushover:D

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

Edited July 17, 2009 by landy_alert
Corrected a mistake!

[alanalana]

You're on track now and pleased to see the FSA taking an interest in LTSB.

 

aa

[RedVixen]

Hi Landy - interesting that there are departments 'supervising' different banks - Lloyds have ignored my charges complaint claiming that they never had it although I pointed out it was sent in with my last PPI complaint and signed for and they haven't bothered to respond to that point I think I will be writing to the FOS about that as well

[landy_alert]

Hi RedVixen:)

 

Yes, I didn't realise that either - whether anything useful will actually come out of it is another matter - I guess there have to be very many complaints before someone as big as LTSB get their knuckles rapped, but the more that report them the better.

 

We have now filed a complaint with the FOS about the way LTSB have dealt with our charges issue too, as well as a further complaint to the FSA. Normally I only threaten to complain to the relevant bodies, but now I've decided to actually carry out my threats:D

 

Since the beginning of the year we have had at least 20 responses from LTSB regarding our charges and none of them really giving a definitive answer.

 

I'm a bit concerned that the FOS will be getting fed up with Mr Landy and I, but I suppose that's what they are there for - particularly when LTSB are being so obstructive!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[IdaInFife]

sorry to jump in your thread landy

 

i see the ppi was from 2004. Is there a timelimit you can claim on settled accounts?

 

ida x

[landy_alert]

sorry to jump in your thread landy

 

i see the ppi was from 2004. Is there a timelimit you can claim on settled accounts?

 

ida x

 

Hi Ida:)

 

No probs! The FOS told Mr Landy when he phoned them about his two loans with LTSB (on my other thread) which were settled in 2002, that the date they were settled is immaterial its the fact that they were mis-sold that counts. Its when you realised the PPI had been mis-sold that's important.

 

I think alanalana has won a claim for PPI which dates back to 1998.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[ccridersuz]

I've been informed that Lloyds TSB won't sign for recorded delivery letter's, whether this is true or not I don't know. But, there is an alternative, PO guaranteed delivery, it costs £3+ but guarantees delivery before 1pm the following day.

My hubbies PPI just over £330 was returned within weeks, upon telephoning it was discovered, that PPI under £500 is easier!!! to deal with, whatever that means. I am 10 weeks into waiting.

[RedVixen]

Just to back up what Landy said about time limits - I am waiting for the numbers for an offer for all premiums form 1998 as well

 

Suzzanne - I have managed to track all the letter I sent recorded to Lloyds so they have been signed for even if in bulk

[IdaInFife]

thanks Landy and Red

 

Ida x

[alanalana]

sorry to jump in your thread landy

 

i see the ppi was from 2004. Is there a timelimit you can claim on settled accounts?

 

ida x

 

Hello Idainfife,

 

I claimed back to 1998 on loans with Direct Line Financial Services which were legally transferred to RBS. All of my loans were refinancing and all had PPI attached. Six of the seven loans had been settled on refinancing. I believe that claims can go back as far as you want. The banks keep the records as has been proved in my claim. The ICO also upheld a complaint about the failure of RBS to supply the data within the guidelines of the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

aa

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone:)

 

Just updating this thread -

 

Unfortunately I think I have confused the FOS slightly with all the LTSB complaints I have been making:(

 

I submitted two Complaint Forms to the FOS relating to these two particular settled loans as well as sending separately a Formal Complaint about the way LTSB has handled our concerns (ie, totally ignoring our letters!). Initially they acknowledged receipt of the Complaint Forms but didn't respond to the Formal Complaint.

 

The FOS has now returned my Formal Complaint letter along with a new Complaint Form for the same two loans, asking me to fill it out and return it, along with my original letter.

 

I presume they are not there on a saturday so can't call them till monday.

 

I suppose it was only to be expected when they are so busy!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[alanalana]

Hey landy,

 

The FOS are happy to see claims for multiple refinanced loans. That is probably why they are asking you to resubmit. I had four loans with Direct Line Financial Services and three with RBS. I wrote to RBS and had one hell of a fight over 12 months. I eventually submitted to complaints to the FOS one for the 4 dlfs loans all were refinancing loans and one for the three rbs loans again all refinancing with the last one still active.

 

I eventually got money back on both complaints and the ICO upheld my complaint against rbs under the sixth principle in their failure to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

My point is keep up the pressure I am still awaiting a response from LTSB which is due on 3 Aug and then it will be LBA, 7 day deadline and complaint to the ICO.

 

As the PPI issue develops and caggers start to get results the banks will change tactics to drag things out. They will put obstacles in your way and the aim of the game is to get you so miffed you give up.

 

The fight must go on especially for the thousands that do no have the means to get onto the CAG site. The more of a fight we put up the more it may hit the headlines and have a positive affect to see PPI outlawed completely at the point of sale.

 

rant over ( no cricket today )

[landy_alert]

Hi everyone:)

 

At last a long awaited update to this thread -

 

Firstly I will summarise what has occured up till now............

 

Mr L and I had two loans in joint names dating from Jan and Sept 2003, on both of which we believe the PPI was mis-sold as we were told it was a condition of acceptance for the loan.

 

Loan 1 was for £6000 plus PPI of approx £1300

 

Loan 2 was for £20,000 plus PPI of approx £4300 (this was to consolidate Loan 1 plus further advance for DIY etc)

 

We put these two loans together in one complaint to LTSB -

 

8th May - sent mis-sold PPI letter to LTSB via recorded del - no reply

 

28th May - sent second letter to LTSB via recorded del - no reply

 

11th June - sent third letter to LTSB via recorded del - no reply

 

7th July - filed complaint with FOS

 

10th July - FOS acknowledged complaint

 

15th August - FOS say they will contact LTSB and will update within 2 months

 

So you will see that up till now there has been no acknowledgement of our complaint by LTSB.

 

Today we receive a letter from LTSB regarding Loan 1 which states the following -

 

'Thank you for your patience while I have investigated the concern you raised regarding your Loan Protection Insurance Policy.............I have decided to uphold your complaint and offer to settle your complaint in the following manner which is in line with the standard redress remedy recommended by the Financial Ombudsman Service.'

 

The letter continues that when we repaid the loan early (on taking out Loan 2) we received a PPI rebate (which I was aware of) and that the redress calculations are worked out as follows -

 

'I will calculate the difference between the settlement balance you have paid on the loan and what the settlement would have been had the PPI premium not been added to your loan. The difference between those figures shows that the settlement figure should have been reduced by £1**.**. We will then calculate an 8% interest payment on this sum from the day the loan was settled to the day the calculation is completed.

 

I will then calculate the amount you have paid up to the date of cancellation and refund this back to you. This is worked out by calculating how much you paid each month in respect of insurance loan alone and then multiplying this figure by how many months the insurance was active for, which is calculated to be £2**.**.

 

I will then add simple interest at 8% per annum to each monthly payment from the date you paid each amount, to the date you settled the loan.

 

A further 8% simple interest per annum will be calculated on this total amount from the date of early settlement of the loan to the present date.

 

Following the addition of the above two calculations, our total offer to you in full and final settlement of your complaint is £6**.**.

 

As you received a partial rebate in respect of your insurance of £9**.** on **/**/** this is taken into consideration in above amount and has already been deducted from the above figure.

 

In the event that you accept this offer please be aware that as our calculations are based as at the date of this letter, the final amount you receive may include a slightly higher interest payment.'

 

There is no mention of the FOS in this letter, other than the usual 'if you do not accept the offer you have the right to refer yourcomplaint to the FOS', ie, they haven't mentioned the fact that this is already subject to an FOS complaint and has been since July. It's almost as if the person who has sent the letter is unaware of the involvement of the FOS.

 

I had worked out calculations for how much refund I thought would be due on this loan, but as we had already received a rebate and the loan was then consolidated into another, I am not sure if my calcs were correct - they certainly don't resemble the figure LTSB have offered:? (Mine was higher)

 

Do you think that LTSB have pre-empted the FOS decision in the hope that we will fill out the enclosed acceptance form (which states it is their Full and Final offer) and thereby accept a lower figure than the FOS would award?

 

Bearing in mind the FOS would also award compensation............

 

If this offer had come as a result of FOS intervention, I would have assumed we would have first received a letter from the FOS informing us of LTSB's decision to uphold our complaint (as they did with our MBNA complaint) - instead we have not even received the promised update from the FOS yet, so I'm inclined to think Lloyds are being sneaky here:eek:

 

I'm going to look again at my calculations and think I should probably inform the FOS that LTSB have made this offer before deciding whether to accept it or not.

 

Any advice would be most gratefully accepted as always!

 

Thank you,

 

Landy x

[alanalana]

The FSA has decided to come down on PPI hence I believe you have now had an offer.

 

The refunds you should be getting back should be.

 

On first loan.

 

The monthly PPI premiums you paid with contractual interested added up until the loan was refinanced and then 8% statutory interest from the date of each monthly payment up until settlement of your claim.

 

For second loan.

 

If the second loan is still running with the PPI you should cancel that PPI but ensure you have alternative cover for any outstandling loan amounts.

 

You should then claim as for the first loan ie monthly PPI premiums plus contractual and then 8% statutory interest.

 

The FSA is getting tougher now but still the banks will try and short change you.

 

Perhaps ask Pompeyfaith to look at your figures.

 

Here are the two calculators he pointed in my direction.

 

Compound interest calculator

 

Blake Lapthorn - simple interest calculator

 

I have just rejected an offer from Capital One as I believe the refund offer should have been higher and the FOS have been resent the bundle of documents.

 

aa

[landy_alert]

Hi aa:)

 

Thanks for your advice - it's most appreciated.

 

The second loan isn't still running, both loans in this claim were settled early in Feb 2004.

 

LTSB's offer only refers to one of the loans even though our original complaint to them and our subsequent complaint to the FOS referred to both loans as the second one refinanced/consolidated the first.

 

I did use the calculators as recommended by PF - trouble is because the balance on the first loan was carried over to the second and the rebate received at the time was used to adjust this amount it is very difficult to know exactly how much refund is now due.

 

As for the contractual v statutory interest question, I have just found some info from the FOS website which I must have printed off earlier in the year when I started my PPI claims. It is entitled -

 

How does the ombudsman service approach redress where a payment protection insurance (PPI) policy has been mis-sold?

 

It gives examples of how the FOS calculate refunds on single premium policies and I quote from the example given whereby a the loan and PPI policy were terminated early before the FOS decision -

 

'Case study 2

 

We upheld the complaint by Mr T on the basis that the financial business had mis-sold him the PPI policy. We concluded but for the financial business's failings, Mr T would not have purchased the PPI policy. In his case:

 

His overall loan was for £23,000 (with monthly payments of £430) - but it would have been £18,000 (with monthly payments of £340) without the additional lending to fund the single premium PPI policy;

 

The term of the loan and policy was for 60 months;

 

The loan and policy were cancelled after Mr T had made 24 monthly payments;

 

Mr T was require to pay £15,500 to settle the loan (after the business had taken account of the rebate of premium he was due of £1200); but if he had not had the PPI added to the loan, the smaller loan of £18,000 would have cost £13,000 to settle at the same point.

 

So Mr T had paid the lender £90 a month more than he would have done, had the financial business not mis-sold the PPI policy; and £2500 more to settle the loan, when he cancelled the loan and policy after 24 months. Accordingly, we required the financial business to -

 

Return to Mr T each of the excess monthly payments of £90 that he had made over the twenty-four months up to the date of settlement (£2160);

 

Calculate the difference between the settlement costs Mr T incurred when he ended the loan early and those he would have incurred, had he settled the loan without the additional PPI element at the same time (£15,500 - £13,000 = £2500) - and to pay that difference to Mr T;

 

Add interest to each of these excess payments of £90 and to the excess settlement cost (£2500) - at a rate of 8% simple from the date each payment was made (and from the datethat excess cost was incurred) until the date the financial business repaid Mr T;

 

Pay Mr T £400 for the extra inconvenience he had been caused in having to refer his complaint to us -because the financial business had rejected his complaint without properly analysing the defects in its sales practices and had delayed its responses to his enquiries; and

 

Set out for Mr T the details of its calculations.'

 

So from the way LTSB have explained their method of calculating redress it would appear very similar in format to that recommended by the FOS.

 

In the FOS's recommendations there is no mention of Contractual Interest

 

I believe as aa has suggested that the reason LTSB have suddenly decided to capitulate over this issue has something to do with the FSA's announcement and also that by getting us to agree to their offer before the FOS make their decision on our complaint, they escape having to pay us any compensation that the FOS would award, particularly as until today this was the first time LTSB had so much as acknowledged our complaint!

 

Trouble is I still cannot fathom whether what they have said about the difference between the settlement cost on the loan with PPI and what this would have been without PPI is correct or not..............as aa has suggested, maybe I should ask Pompeyfaith to have a look for me;)

 

Apologies for the rant/length of this post!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

[middenmess]

It would make sense for you to request the actual figures and sums that LTSB have used in the calculations, for you [and pompeyfaith if you contact him] to peruse.

 

You could then identify where and by how much your figures differ from theirs.

 

Will the FOS tell you the amount they would be expecting LTSB to be paying back to you or how they would expect LTSB to calculate the repayment figure?

[landy_alert]

Hi middenmess:)

 

Thanks for your advice - it's most appreciated.

 

The FOS probably wouldn't give an exact amount - if our recent MBNA complaint is anything to go by. The FOS upheld the complaint and asked Mr Landy to sign an acceptance form agreeing to the refund.

 

When we queried this with the FOS, saying we were concerned that by signing it we were agreeing to an unknown figure they said they couldn't tell us an amount but we could always query it later if we were unhappy with the refund - which is exactly what has happened:(

 

Going by the quote I gave in my previous post from the FOS website it would appear that LTSB are using a similar method to calculate the refund as that used by the FOS - ie, no mention of Contractual Interest!!!

 

The difficult part is working out how the rebate we originally received when this loan was refinanced and what would have been owed at that point if we hadn't had the PPI in the first place, has impacted on the refund due now:?

 

I'm going to have another look at all the paperwork tomorrow and if need be will do as you suggest and ask LTSB to supply further info.

 

I still get the feeling they are trying to get us to accept the refund before the FOS come back to us - with what may or may not be a better offer.

 

Thanks again,

 

Landy x

[alanalana]

Hi aa:)

 

Thanks for your advice - it's most appreciated.

 

The second loan isn't still running, both loans in this claim were settled early in Feb 2004.

 

LTSB's offer only refers to one of the loans even though our original complaint to them and our subsequent complaint to the FOS referred to both loans as the second one refinanced/consolidated the first.

 

I did use the calculators as recommended by PF - trouble is because the balance on the first loan was carried over to the second and the rebate received at the time was used to adjust this amount it is very difficult to know exactly how much refund is now due.

 

As for the contractual v statutory interest question, I have just found some info from the FOS website which I must have printed off earlier in the year when I started my PPI claims. It is entitled -

 

How does the ombudsman service approach redress where a payment protection insurance (PPI) policy has been mis-sold?

 

It gives examples of how the FOS calculate refunds on single premium policies and I quote from the example given whereby a the loan and PPI policy were terminated early before the FOS decision -

 

'Case study 2

 

We upheld the complaint by Mr T on the basis that the financial business had mis-sold him the PPI policy. We concluded but for the financial business's failings, Mr T would not have purchased the PPI policy. In his case:

 

His overall loan was for £23,000 (with monthly payments of £430) - but it would have been £18,000 (with monthly payments of £340) without the additional lending to fund the single premium PPI policy;

 

The term of the loan and policy was for 60 months;

 

The loan and policy were cancelled after Mr T had made 24 monthly payments;

 

Mr T was require to pay £15,500 to settle the loan (after the business had taken account of the rebate of premium he was due of £1200); but if he had not had the PPI added to the loan, the smaller loan of £18,000 would have cost £13,000 to settle at the same point.

 

So Mr T had paid the lender £90 a month more than he would have done, had the financial business not mis-sold the PPI policy; and £2500 more to settle the loan, when he cancelled the loan and policy after 24 months. Accordingly, we required the financial business to -

 

Return to Mr T each of the excess monthly payments of £90 that he had made over the twenty-four months up to the date of settlement (£2160);

 

Calculate the difference between the settlement costs Mr T incurred when he ended the loan early and those he would have incurred, had he settled the loan without the additional PPI element at the same time (£15,500 - £13,000 = £2500) - and to pay that difference to Mr T;

 

Add interest to each of these excess payments of £90 and to the excess settlement cost (£2500) - at a rate of 8% simple from the date each payment was made (and from the datethat excess cost was incurred) until the date the financial business repaid Mr T;

 

Pay Mr T £400 for the extra inconvenience he had been caused in having to refer his complaint to us -because the financial business had rejected his complaint without properly analysing the defects in its sales practices and had delayed its responses to his enquiries; and

 

Set out for Mr T the details of its calculations.'

 

So from the way LTSB have explained their method of calculating redress it would appear very similar in format to that recommended by the FOS.

 

In the FOS's recommendations there is no mention of Contractual Interest

 

I believe as aa has suggested that the reason LTSB have suddenly decided to capitulate over this issue has something to do with the FSA's announcement and also that by getting us to agree to their offer before the FOS make their decision on our complaint, they escape having to pay us any compensation that the FOS would award, particularly as until today this was the first time LTSB had so much as acknowledged our complaint!

 

Trouble is I still cannot fathom whether what they have said about the difference between the settlement cost on the loan with PPI and what this would have been without PPI is correct or not..............as aa has suggested, maybe I should ask Pompeyfaith to have a look for me;)

 

Apologies for the rant/length of this post! Makes you feel better

 

Regards,

 

Landy x

 

You are right about the contractual interest perhaps it is time to turn the tables on this issue, which is what I am trying to do with capital one.

 

The following is something PF posted up...

 

This covers the situation where:

 

• the PPI policy has a single up-front premium; that premium is added to the loan; interest is charged on the premium; and the monthly repayments include repayment of the premium and the interest on it.
  

Depending on the precise circumstances of the case, redress will normally involve five main considerations:

 

• a calculation of the monthly payments that the consumer has actually paid towards the overall loan in excess of those they would have needed to make, if the original loan had been sold without the PPI policy;
  
• a restructuring of the loan going forward (if it is still in place) so that the amount owed, the monthly repayments, the term and the charges reflect those that would have applied, if the original loan had been sold without the PPI policy; or if the loan was terminated early, then a comparison of the settlement costs that the consumer incurred with those they would have incurred, if the PPI premium had not been added to the loan;
  
• the cancellation of the PPI policy (if it is still in place) – with any rebate in premiums being set against the costs incurred by the financial business in paying the redress;
  
• the addition of interest (normally at the rate of 8% simple per annum) to any excess payments made by the consumer – from the time each payment was made to the point the financial business pays them back to the consumer;
  
• consideration of a payment for distress and inconvenience – for example, where the financial business rejected a complaint that it knew (or should have known) that the ombudsman service would uphold.
  

And just to be bloody minded this is my link to my fight with cap one.

 

alanalana v capital one

 

No contractual interest offered but a robust defence to their claims of non advised sales.

 

keep up with the fight PPI is getting bigger and we the consumers are getting back our money

[landy_alert]

Hi aa:)

 

Thanks for the additional info.

 

I don't intend to give up on this without a fight and as we have not heard back from the FOS yet, I'm not just going to accept what LTSB say as gospel and definitely won't be taking them up on their 'offer' either:mad:

 

The thing is it has become the norm to ask for contractual plus 8% interest and many people appear to have had some success in having this refunded, so that a precedent has been set for others to expect it.

 

It's strange that when you study the info given out on the FOS website, they do not seem to be recommending the refunding of contractual interest at all:confused:

 

I guess we will await the promised update from the FOS and maybe give them a call to see what they have to say about LTSB's 'offer'. I will have to send the FOS a copy anyway to add to our complaint file.

 

I can't imagine LTSB being too keen to tell me how they worked out their figures, but it wouldn't hurt to ask!

 

Regards,

 

Landy x