Blackhorse PPI claim rejected

[kokorunna]

Please I need some help, I took out a loan awhile ago that am still paying for it and decided to claim my PPI back, I called Blackhorse and filled in the questionnaire that was sent to me but to my amazement today I received a letter stating "In your questionnaire dated you said

1. You were not informed of the features, benefits, exclusions and limitations of the policy
   
2. You were told that taking out the policy would increase your chances of getting the loan
   
3. It was not made clear that the PPI policy is optional
   
4. You advised that we automatically included PPI in the quotation
   
5. You were pressurized into taking the policy
   

Their conclusions are "In light of my findings, I feel that our adviser acted fairly and reasonably throughout the sale, I have found nothing to suggest that you were compelled into the taking out the policy. I believe that the information provided at the time of sale was a fair presentation of the features of the policy and explained the policy exclusions and the total cost of insurance. I am also of the opinion that it was clear, fair and not misleading therefore allowing you to make a fully informed choice. My review has not highlighted any failings with the sale that would lead me to believe your decisions to purchase the PPI policy would have changed."

 

What can I do now as I need your help please

[RW Fugitive]

Complain to the FOS and see what happens

[dx100uk]

Please I need some help, I took out a loan awhile ago that am still paying for it and decided to claim my PPI back, I called Blackhorse and filled in the questionnaire that was sent to me but to my amazement today I received a letter stating "In your questionnaire dated you said

1. You were not informed of the features, benefits, exclusions and limitations of the policy
   
2. You were told that taking out the policy would increase your chances of getting the loan
   
3. It was not made clear that the PPI policy is optional
   
4. You advised that we automatically included PPI in the quotation
   
5. You were pressurized into taking the policy
   

Their conclusions are "In light of my findings, I feel that our adviser acted fairly and reasonably throughout the sale, I have found nothing to suggest that you were compelled into the taking out the policy. I believe that the information provided at the time of sale was a fair presentation of the features of the policy and explained the policy exclusions and the total cost of insurance. I am also of the opinion that it was clear, fair and not misleading therefore allowing you to make a fully informed choice. My review has not highlighted any failings with the sale that would lead me to believe your decisions to purchase the PPI policy would have changed."

 

What can I do now as I need your help please

 

typical of BH

 

speculating upon what should of happened rather than what DID!

 

they were not there!!

 

write and complain and make ref to section 56 of the cca

 

Consumer Credit Act Section 56. refers...

— (1) In this Act “antecedent negotiations ” means any negotiations with the debtor or hirer—

(a) conducted by the creditor or owner in relation to the making of any regulated agreement, or

(b) conducted by a credit-broker in relation to goods sold or proposed to be sold by the credit-broker to the creditor before forming the subject-matter of a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement within section 12(a), or

© conducted by the supplier in relation to a transaction financed or proposed to be financed by a debtor-creditor-supplier agreement and “negotiator ” means the person by whom negotiations are so conducted with the debtor or hirer.

dx

[kokorunna]

Thanks for the response but do you have template letter I can write and complain with reference to section 56 of the cca.

 

I appreciate your feedbacks

[dx100uk]

no

 

template letters only get temple answers.

 

dx

[MSAR]

They always say that

 

As someone else commented, trying to get a PPI refund with some banks is like trying to catch a monkey in a tree. You are going to have to outsmart them by getting them to contradict themselves. The first thing to do is to get as much paper evidence against them: the original Credit Card Agreement, copies of all statements, your request for a PPI refund, their "final response", dates when items were sent and received by post (recorded by next day delivery or registered post). Sometimes the bank agents are so eager to get the commission from PPI, they just ticked the box in for you. Or they put in small print that negated the logic, so by opting out by not ticking the box, they actually opted you in. Or maybe they just filled in the form for you and asked you to sign the lines marked with an X. Doing these always counts against them.

 

You'll need all the above documents for several uses: to make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman, a complaint to the Information Compliance Officer or a small claims court. The more documents you have, the more often they contradict themselves: They'll say their records don't go back more than 6 years, yet they will be able produce a CCA from 20 years ago. They'll give you monthly statements from a SAR, but mix up the dates, so they give you 2005 instead of 2008, but said the records were no available. All that works to your advantage in the end.

 

With the CCA, your request for a refund, and the banks final response, you can make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman. However, as there are over 1000 complaints/day coming in, it will now take a year for them to get to your case. The bank statements are useful in order to determine how much of a refund you are owed.

 

 

Use the Data Protection Act to get past bank statements. Very often, banks try and weasel out of this by just giving you a subset of the statements you requested. Sometimes they do this even after multiple requests. By law they have 40 working days to respond to your request from the day it was delivered to their offices. If they refuse, only partially send you information, or provide no explanation why they can't provide you with the data, you have them trapped on a branch and can make a complaint with the ICO. Several court cases have used this to demonstrate that the bank was either incompetent or deliberately obstructive.