Jump to content



BBA - v FSA - PPI Judicial Review


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3537 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2011/039.shtml

 

FSA/PN/039/2011

20 April 2011

 

We welcome the High Court’s dismissal of the British Bankers’ Association’s (BBA) and Nemo Personal Finance Limited’s (Nemo) legal challenge to our payment protection insurance (PPI) measures.

 

Our primary aim has always been to get proper redress, once and for all, for those with genuine complaints.

 

We believe this decision signals the end of years of poor complaint handling and will trigger a dramatic improvement in the way customers are treated when complaining.

 

There have been more than 1.5 million complaints made about PPI since the Financial Services Authority (FSA) took over regulation of it in 2005. On average, firms have rejected around 60% of the complaints made to them, but some rejected almost all of them. However, the vast majority of complaints referred to the Financial Ombudsmanlink3.gif Service (the Ombudsmanlink3.gif) are found in the consumer’s favour.

 

However this is not the end of the process: the BBA and Nemo may seek to appeal the court’s judgment.

 

The FSA has not put a waiver in place so firms must continue to deal with complaints where possible, including letting customers know they can refer their complaint to the Ombudsmanlink3.gif if they are unable to progress it.

 

Failure to do so may result in Enforcement action.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 257
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The BBC article has changed since I read it at 10.30, in that version it quoted that banking woman as saying that they would probably put present claims on hold whilst they decided whether to appeal or not. Obviously if they were to appeal any claims would remain on hold.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites
Banks have 21 days to consider whether to appeal the ruling. The BBA said that complaints would continue to be placed on hold until it had decided whether or not to make an appeal.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/1b687c0a-6a6d-11e0-a464-00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz1K3v3nXiN

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Banking woman', Angela Knight?

 

The BBC article has changed since I read it at 10.30, in that version it quoted that banking woman as saying that they would probably put present claims on hold whilst they decided whether to appeal or not. Obviously if they were to appeal any claims would remain on hold.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I call her the banking woman. ;)

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Current lender updates:

 

 

 

Lloyds – Will deal with claim, investigate upto the final response, will not give any final responses until the issues have been sorted – no timescale given.

 

HSBC – all new claims will be acknowledged, then no further work will be done, any which had a final decision made before the 08/10/2010 will still be issued

 

Barclays – Will acknowledge claims, will work on if needed but no final response will be issued.

 

 

MBNA – will acknowledge claims, nothing further will be done, no further work and no final responses.

 

 

Halifax - new cases will be acknowledged, any claims after the 08/10/2010 can't have a full review done so no final response, any claims before that date that had been reviewed will still have a final response issued on them.

 

RBS – all claims are being dealt with in the usual way, reviewing and issuing final responses, any claims that have been affected by the JR will be notified, no explaination of which claims could be affected.

 

Lloyds puts PPI claims on hold in defiance of regulator:

 

Defiance

A Lloyds spokeswoman says: "We will stand by any settlements that have already been made to customers. The court case will not affect those offers.

"However, while the court is considering the issues raised by the BBA, any PPI sales-related complaints will be on hold until further notice. This decision was taken in full consultation with the BBA."

That statement is in defiance of the FSA's stance.

 

The regulator said on Friday: "In the interests of consumers, firms will be expected to continue handling complaints while this process is ongoing."

It is understood the FSA could take action against banks that don't follow those guidelines.

 

Meanwhile, a BBA spokeswoman says: "The only people who can put complaints on hold are the FSA, the Ombudsman or the courts."

Bank charges claims were put on hold in July 2007 pending the result of the historic case into overdraft fees, which banks won.

But that action was permitted by the FSA, the Ombudsman and the courts.

 

What can consumers do?

 

The Financial Ombudsman Service, the independent arbitrator, is still hearing complaints. You must normally complain to your bank and wait until a firm rejection or if the issue has not been resolved within eight weeks, before involving the Ombudsman.

It says in this case it will treat a hold as a trigger to allow it to investigate.

 

A whopping 81% of consumers who complain to the Ombudsman on PPI win their case. Yet only an average of 5% of rejected complainants, across all product sectors, take their case to the arbitrator.

 

MoneySavingExpert.com comment

 

Martin Lewis, MoneySavingExpert.com creator, says: "This is an outrage. The bank charges reclaiming hold was ordered by the courts and agreed with by the FSA – this is something quite different.

 

"This type of action is like a black-hatted cowboy riding into town, whooping and yelling, and pretending they're untouchable. It's time for the FSA to polish up its sheriff's badge, kick in its spurs and shoot them down.

"We know 81% of people who go to the Ombudsman with PPI complaints win. We know there has been systemic mis-selling.

"What we need to see now, after the charade of the bank charges technicality, is the institutions of state provide real justice for the millions who've been mis-sold billions worth of PPI.

 

"This must be sorted urgently. The FSA needs to check its rule book to see what else can be done. In extremes, it should arrange that customers bypass their own banks and simply complain direct to the Ombudsman.

"It would be quite staggering if it were held to ransom."

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual, a law unto themselves. They should really should be done for contempt. :evil:

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FSA has not put a waiver in place so firms must continue to deal with complaints where possible, including letting customers know they can refer their complaint to the Ombudsmanlink3.gif if they are unable to progress it.

 

Failure to do so may result in Enforcement action.

 

 

The regulator said on Friday: "In the interests of consumers, firms will be expected to continue handling complaints while this process is ongoing."

 

LLoyds

 

A Lloyds spokeswoman says: "We will stand by any settlements that have already been made to customers. The court case will not affect those offers.

"However, while the court is considering the issues raised by the BBA, any PPI sales-related complaints will be on hold until further notice. This decision was taken in full consultation with the BBA."

 

we need a newsletter IMHO

 

 

HSBC WON three times!!!!! Read about my continuing battle (claim FOUR!) Link HERE

Capital One WON Link

HERE

GE capital (5 accounts) WON link HERE

Lloyds bank account WON second claim starting! link HERE

Budget insurance cough up WON link HERE

Principles WON link HERE

A&L (Mrs Crusher's account) claim link HERE

Barclays claim link HERE

 

Any advice given is on an informal basis only and without prejudice or liability. In in any doubt, consult a qualified lawyer.

IF YOU HAVE GOT YOUR MONEY BACK, PUT SOME BACK INTO THE SITE TO HELP KEEP IT OPEN!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The banks have to be pro active, go over their PPI sales to establish if they mis-sold PPI, beeb reckons it could cost the banks £4.5 billion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi CB ... this is excellent news ! :)

 

however , as I've just posted on the main headlines site :

 

They're trying to play the same old time wasting game they did with Bank Charges ... however , this time the FSA hasd not given them a waiver ... so all complaints must be dealt with as normal ... or they should be reported to the Ombudsman .....

 

They have been told to deal with these ... they should not get away with flouting the rules and resorting to the same old corrupt fiddles to get out of it ...

 

IMHO the FSA helped them out of it the last time ... let's hope this time they show some backbone and order compliance .... without the banks being allowed to drag this lot all the way to the Supreme Court again ...I think it's abuse of the system .... :evil:

 

Let's keep the pressure on ... don't give 'em an inch ....

Nemo me impune lacessit

 

 

Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

 

If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
The banks have to be pro active, go over their PPI sales to establish if they mis-sold PPI, beeb reckons it could cost the banks £4.5 billion.

 

even so as most of the decisions of the banks basically deny any misselling and cause people to go to the ombundsman will this be any different, they surely will just say this one was sold correctly... next....

 

Cynical of me I know...

Are You as Anonymous on CAG as You Think You Are? *Link*

 

The CAG is a free help site,should you be offered help that requires payment,please report it to site team.

 

Deal with your debts:

STEP ONE - Dont Panic! | STEP TWO - Priority & Non Priority Debts | STEP THREE - Personal Budget Sheet | STEP FOUR - A SAFE bank Account | STEP FIVE - Dealing with Priority Debts | STEP SIX - Non-priority Debts | STEP SEVEN - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt1 | STEP EIGHT - Non-Priority Debt-Repayment Opt2 | STEP NINE - Perils of Consolidation | STEP TEN - RE-Evaluate Frequently

 

***** SERIOUSLY IN DEBT, DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO, TRY NationalDebtLine's MoneySteps *****

 

 

IMPORTANT: Please take my advice in the spirit it is given and on the basis that I am expressing my opinion, These opinions are not endorsed by CAG in anyway and are offered informally without prejudice or warranty of any kind. These opinions are solely based upon the knowledge I've gained from this fantastic site and life in general. I have NO legal training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got it in a 'nut shell', these banks need to be fined for failing to look into a complaint correctly. I'd stick £50,000 for each complaint where it's found that they haven't looked into it. A similar situation occured when folk were told to Opt Out of Company Pensions in favour of a Personal Pensions, about 20 years ago.

 

even so as most of the decisions of the banks basically deny any misselling and cause people to go to the ombundsman will this be any different, they surely will just say this one was sold correctly... next....

 

Cynical of me I know...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Full Judgement is here:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/999.html

 

business-13128692%7ERS%7Eq%7ERS%7E%7ERS%7Ez%7ERS%7E42%7ERS%7E

s?name=news.business.story.13143819.page&cps_asset_id=13143819&page_type=story&section=business&app_version=6.2.33-RC6&first_pub=2011-04-20T11:48:23+00:00&last_editorial_update=2011-04-20T11:48:23+00:00&title=Q%26A%3A+What+now+for+PPI%3F+&comments_box=false&cps_media_type=&cps_media_state=&app_type=web&ml_name=SSI&ml_version=0.1.28&language=en-GB

 

 

 

Q&A: What now for payment protection insurance?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13143819:

 

The UK's banks have lost an attempt to thwart new regulations on how they should sell payment protection insurance (PPI).

 

Crucially, the rules also lay down how the banks should deal with past cases of potential mis-selling of PPI, which could lead to an extra compensation bill running into billions of pounds.

 

The High Court heard a judicial review brought principally by the British Bankers' Association (BBA) against the recently updated rules of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).

 

The judges rejected the BBA's arguments that the rules were unfair because they were retrospective.

 

So, what happens now?

Possibly not much yet.

The BBA has 21 days in which to decide to appeal. In the meantime individual banks are still putting on hold many of the new PPI complaints that are being lodged with them.

If an appeal goes ahead, then thousands of new complaints will continue to pile up.

 

What if the banks give in?

Under the FSA's new rules, banks and other lenders such as credit card companies will have to be much more careful about how they sell new PPI policies to borrowers.

Separately, the Competition Commission is bringing in new rules which will stop lenders selling PPI at the point when they grant a loan.

So the whole business faces a severe restriction anyway.

 

What about the compensation?

This is the really big issue.

The banks were told two years ago to re-examine complaints they had already rejected.

The new rules suggest that additionally they will have to contact all past PPI customers - even those who have never complained.

The FSA estimated last year that if about 20% of those responded, the industry could be landed with an extra compensation bill of £2.7bn, plus administration costs of up to £315m.

In the recent court hearings, that potential bill for the industry was put even higher, at about £4.5bn.

 

So how many people will all this involve?

The FSA estimated that its new measures would boost the expected number of complaints to 550,000 a year for the next five years - in other words 2.75 million.

But that was based on the 20% response rate mentioned above.

Clearly there is scope for many more people to complain, and for this to cost banks and other lenders much more.

 

How much compensation is likely to be paid?

Across the whole industry, no-one knows. It is all informed guess work so far.

But the FSA estimated that someone who had been mis-sold a single-premium policy where they paid all the cost up-front, might be repaid an average of £1,800.

Someone who had bought a policy requiring regular premiums would receive on average £900.

 

So, what should I do if I think I was mis-sold PPI?

If you still have the paperwork, look back at all your loans and see if there was any evidence you bought a PPI policy.

Check the details of the PPI policy itself, if you have it. Ask yourself some questions:

 

  • Did you realise at the time you were buying this insurance?

 

  • Were you told (falsely) you had to buy it?
  • Did it really cover you in the first place? (Self- employed people, for example, are not covered by PPI)
  • Did you even need it?

If you think you have grounds for complaint, write to the firm which sold the policy and lodge your complaint.

If it is rejected, or nothing happens within eight weeks, you can complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).

 

What will the FOS do?

It can look at your case again.

It received 100,000 such complaints in the last financial year - and upheld about 75% in favour of the customers.

It is currently receiving about 5,000 PPI complaints a week, so a backlog is building up very quickly.

Edited by Michael Browne
Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Lewis has just said if they don't lift the 'hold' on current claims they should have their licence to sell insurance withdrawn.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised they haven't thrown their toys around & threatened to run away abroad like they did over the bonus payments.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Lewis has just said if they don't lift the 'hold' on current claims they should have their licence to sell insurance withdrawn.

they are more likely to fly to the moon on a winged horse than get anything more than a mild slapped wrist.

 

 

 

HSBC WON three times!!!!! Read about my continuing battle (claim FOUR!) Link HERE

Capital One WON Link

HERE

GE capital (5 accounts) WON link HERE

Lloyds bank account WON second claim starting! link HERE

Budget insurance cough up WON link HERE

Principles WON link HERE

A&L (Mrs Crusher's account) claim link HERE

Barclays claim link HERE

 

Any advice given is on an informal basis only and without prejudice or liability. In in any doubt, consult a qualified lawyer.

IF YOU HAVE GOT YOUR MONEY BACK, PUT SOME BACK INTO THE SITE TO HELP KEEP IT OPEN!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They've got away with too much for too long & now they think they're teflon coated. It would be interesting to see a list of major shareholders in these banks because ten pound to a penny strings are well and truly being tugged behind the scenes.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only one way to stop the banks thinking they can do what they like, thats real competition, a People's Bank if you like. Maybe where the people are the shareholders. A reciprocal relationship built on traditional values, where it's about humans and less so computers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There is only one way to stop the banks thinking they can do what they like, thats real competition, a People's Bank if you like. Maybe where the people are the shareholders. A reciprocal relationship built on traditional values, where it's about humans and less so computers.

 

Weren't they once called Building Societies ?

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites
Weren't they once called Building Societies ?

 

Trustee Savings Banks until they were sold by Maggie Thatcher.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trustee_Savings_Bank

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Between us my colleague and I have had 4 phone calls from ambulance chasers today inviting us to reclaim PPI and charges on loans. We thought they seemed a bit keen today. This obviously explains it, but I think we can be confident the banks won't accept this and delays will continue.

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I call her the banking woman. ;)

 

Bless you. What a gentleman. I call her much much worse.

 

I notice they're only talking about contacting people going back 5 years. I wonder what will happen if people claim going back further if they've only found out about this in the last 6 years. Pound to a penny they'll try and wriggle out of paying it - or anything of it come to that.

 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose the banks will say they keep no records beyond 6 years if you try claiming back further. Same as they are now doing with credit card penalty charges.

 

People will need to have their own records if they want back older PPI charges.

Edited by slick132
typo

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The result was expected,as was the response by the BBA,as usual they have devised a plan of action which comes as no suprise.

I bet Lloyds have saved a fortune already with their so called "offers" many have probably agreed to that knowing that the FOS route is likely to take 18 months if not longer.

The irony is that these state owned banks are draining the resources of the FOS-and ignore the state run regulators like some Banana republic.

Well looks like people will have to just take them to Court,cant see any blanket stays for this one.

I think also that if there was anything in the FSA handbook to take them to task on,surely it would have been raised by now.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed.

 

its reminding me of the bank charge days of old.

 

Negotiation? Nah, go right for the jugular in court.

 

 

HSBC WON three times!!!!! Read about my continuing battle (claim FOUR!) Link HERE

Capital One WON Link

HERE

GE capital (5 accounts) WON link HERE

Lloyds bank account WON second claim starting! link HERE

Budget insurance cough up WON link HERE

Principles WON link HERE

A&L (Mrs Crusher's account) claim link HERE

Barclays claim link HERE

 

Any advice given is on an informal basis only and without prejudice or liability. In in any doubt, consult a qualified lawyer.

IF YOU HAVE GOT YOUR MONEY BACK, PUT SOME BACK INTO THE SITE TO HELP KEEP IT OPEN!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...