Barclays ppi claim

[ims21]

Hi weej

 

Stand back a little from this and consider things.

 

Re the PPI you need to have a valid reason for a mis-sell. You stated earlier that..."they did not need, would never have needed, never made a claim and basically didn't question anything and can't even remember this being an option"

 

The question is "why did they not need it and would never have needed it"? the statement "Never made a claim" is not valid unless I have misunderstood you.

 

PPI claims are not the same as charges reclaims, the main reason being that the regulatory bodies that are (and have been in the past) have sorted out redress schemes for PPI redress. They have not done similar for charges claims.

 

Now, if you put in a standard claim for mis-selling of PPI there is are set criteria for what redress would be given if the complaint is upheld. This comprises the following...

 

1 -> a refund of the PPI premiums charged to the account

 

2 -> a refund of any contractual interest charged to the account as a result of those premiums

 

3 -> the account should be reconstructed with the above removed. If the reconstructed account shows that the account would have been in credit for any month then 8% simple interest is awarded on that credit balance for that month.

 

4 -> if the account was paid off and closed then there will be a difference between the amount paid and the reconstructed balance at the time of settlement. 8% simple would be awarded on that difference running from the date of payment to the date of settlement of the claim.

 

5 -> if there were any charges applied to the account which were triggered purely as a result of the above PPI then they should be refunded too along with any contractual interest charged on them and the 8% calculation as mentioned above.

 

To work all of that out you would need to do some work if you are going to try and get to a figure which is anywhere near correct.

 

Don't forget, the banks are not on your side and may well try to stiff you again on any redress they offer. For example, they will almost certainly leave out any charges which were triggered by the mis-sale of PPI.

 

As regards interest rates, I believe this is covered in my description above....you should get back any contractual interest charged as a result of the mis-sold PPI. That means it is the rate they charged the customer. It is not pure compound as much depends on the behaviour of the account.

 

Now, if you want to go for other charges i.e. those which are unconnected with the PPI debacle, there is a different route to take and it may be wise to start a new thread on this subject.

[ims21]

Hi

 

If your neighbour paid the account off in most months then the redress is likely to be fairly low I would guess. The reason being is the the PPI would have been there to protect a balance on the account. If there was no balance then there would not have been a PPI premium in that month a there was nothing to protect if you see what I mean.

 

I understand that employers such as the NHS offered very generous sickness/redundancy and other packages included in the contract of employment and they generally rendered a lender's PPI as pretty much useless.

 

I think the reasons for your claim should revolve around this aspect. The savings aspect is a bit less important but still valid. Most PPI policies would have paid out for six months but if someone had savings which may have covered six months or more then it adds grist to the mill so to speak.

 

Sadly some on here are to be taken with a pinch of salt and you seem to be a wise owl who can pick up on those. If such people were to have been believed in the days of bank charges reclaims then CAG would not be here today. As you have been here since 2006 you will know what I mean when I say it was only due to some who fought for what was right that CAG is here and, although a relative late comer myself, I am proud to be part of this group which has helped bring the banks and other institutions to book and repay their victims the sums of money which they took from them unlawfully, immorally, unfairly and by any other means which they thought fit in order to line their own pockets.