MBNA Mis-sold PPI

[mar1kos]

Link financial will not send PPI documents with s78 request as it has been settled.

They are saying "A statutory response is not required by the Act to include matters no longer in force and for which no funds are owed".

Is this valid any help appreciated

[ims21]

Yes it is correct.

 

Link are the wrong people to be asking for data. You should SAR the original creditor and add a line to the letter to say that it is to include copies of all and any agreements you have ever had with them.

[mar1kos]

I did SAR request to MBNA no PPI documents were sent.

When i did request pursuant S78 to link the sent the agreement but no PPI documents.

They conceded it was not compliant.

Now they are saying there was no need for PPI documents as its been mis sold and settled and therefore they fulfilled their obligation under S78 by just sending the credit agreement without any document refered into it i.e PPI.

This their response to my defence for the court

[ims21]

Court?

 

Can we have the full story please?

 

You mention the word "settled"...what has been settled?

[mar1kos]

Link financial satarted court proceedings in august 2012. (Credit card with MBNA)

 

The account was in dispute (S78 request not fulfilled, balance inaccurate) and Link even refusing a good will of monthly payment plan.

 

They just went for court proceedings without any notice or reply to my letters.

 

CPR 31.14 sent to link ..no reply up to now ...

 

I filed my defence, a court stay was ordered as link did not respond.

 

In the meantime MBNA admitted PPI mis-selling and sent me a refund.

 

LInk sent me their reply to my defence to court few weeks ago.

 

Link sent me a Tomlin Order with charging order on my house. Accepting the Payment plan i offerer them months ago.( which i am refusing)

Link also added their fees to the account. (while they admitted non compliance with s78)

 

In their response :

 

1. They conceded that their reply to my initial S78 request was not compliant.

 

2. Regarding S78 ..any documents refered into agreement..link are saying there is no duty to send them as PPI is settled.

 

"A statutory response is not required by the Act to include matters no longer in force and for which no funds are owed".

i know MBNA as per SAR Request and Link has no PPI documents or policy .

 

3. They are saying also that they are permitted to start court proceeding even when the account was in dispute.

 

4. My defence was also based on Section 18 muliple agreement. Link are claiming it is a Unitary agreement as per s18(b)

They are quoting Heath vs Southern pacific mortgages. They are saying:"The agreement is one integrated package could not be split without affecting the character of transaction."

 

5. PPI mis selling and unfair relationship.

Link are saying :"PPI was a contractual matter not a relationship matter"

6.CPP mis selling (which i am claiming)

Link are saying :"CPP was a contractual matter not a relationship matter"

7.CPP : Link are wrongly claiming in their reply that there are no debits to the account for CPP

 

Any advice appreciated

Edited December 4, 2012 by mar1kos

[mar1kos]

any advice?

[AndyOrch]

Hi Markos

 

I assume the claim is now stayed...they remain in default of your section 78 request...you have received a refund re the PPI. Having received a response to your defence (which is twaddle) until the AQ is initiated it will remain stayed.

 

What advice do you require?

 

Regards

 

Andy