Egg online ppi. 2 years later f-ombudsmen decision.

master99 · September 15, 2010

Hello every one got some rubbish news today from the financial ombudsmen and my

i would like to say first when dealing with this it is very draining, furthermore from the get go, the adjudicator from the financial ombudsmen named "Christina Oreilly", was on the side of Egg from the start, her attitude towards me her tone of voice was wrong, furthermore when speaking on the phone she was defending egg that's when i knew she had already made her decision

Financial ombudsmen are suppose to be in the middle to settle disputes but unfortunately i have found out the hard way they are ****. Complete waste of time, not fit for purpose. i shall be taking this further as fare as i am concerned they should not be allowed to get away with wasting your time and siding with the banks. However that is just in my experience with them.

The adjudicator "Christina OReilly" gives her reasoning to not uphold my complaint! Which in my view is very poor and weak

Adjudicator "Christina OReilly" STATEMENT WORD FOR WORD!...

I have carefully considered all the information that you and Egg have provided. I have set out my findings below:

• I accept Egg may not have adequately explained the ongoing cost of the policy to you and potential monthly benefit that would be paid in return for your premiums. However, even if Egg had done so, I am not persuaded this would have affected your decision to take out the policy. I say this because I think it more likely than not that you would still have purchased the policy had you understood exactly how much the policy would cost and the potential amount you would receive in benefit in the event of a claim.

• Egg has confirmed that the CRP options were not pre-selected and you were presented with the following two options as part of the online process in applying for your card;

Yes, I would like to protect my repayments against accident, sickness and unemployment. (I understand that by clicking on this box I confirm that I have read and agree to the terms of the repayment protection policy.)

No, I do not wish to protect my repayment and I understand that it will be my responsibility to keep up my repayments if I fall ill or lose my job.

You would need to actively select 'yes' on the online application to take out the CRP. I have enclosed a copy of this page for your reference which has been supplied to us by Egg. I have also enclosed a copy of application history which shows the level of payment protection cover selected at the time of the application.

• You indicated that you were unaware that you had protection on the card. However Egg has confirmed in their correspondence to ourselves that you were able to log onto your secure online account and view your statements which were posted online each month, and this would have shown the CRP premium applied to your credit card.

• I have not seen sufficient information to suggest there are any other reasons to recommend that your complaint should be upheld.

Conclusions

Because of this, I have to tell you that I am unable to recommend that your complaint should be upheld. I appreciate that this is likely to come as a disappointment to you. I know that this is not the outcome you were hoping for. Nevertheless, I hope that my explanation has been helpful in setting out clearly why I have taken this view.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you think? your thoughts......?

Mistermind · September 16, 2010

Minor employees speaking with the power of their employer often exceed their remit, adopting an inappropriate tone. Unfortunate.

However FOS by now have clearly-defined criteria on ruling which PPI were mis-sold and which were not. These would be very rigid and objective rules and unless additional material information is provided it is very unlikely the FOS will reverse their adjudication, or that a Small Claims Court judge will overrule the FOS. It is far from the case that the FOS takes Egg's side in every PPI dispute, as evidenced by the list of claimant wins below. The regulators, can't remember if it was OFT or FOS, imposed a hefty exemplary fine on Egg for PPI mis-selling, putting the fear of God in Egg to such a degree that Egg capitulated with full refund in many instances immediately upon receiving a PPI claim. It all depends on whether the circumstances of enrolment fitted the established criteria of mis-selling. The finer details are discussed in the following 17 winning claims -- and 2 lost.

17 PPI battles won, 2 lost:

34 weeks -

25 APR 2007 -

won PPI before court

-

Annalh v Egg/DLA/Eversheds ** Judgement given by court **