Who is my ppi claim against? ge or 1st group or safestyle windows?

[Consett26]

We’ve been clearing out a load of old paperwork and have come across a loan with some PPI that was mis-sold because I wasn’t told about it (and would have turned it down if given the opportunity because I was self-employed).

 

The loan was in 2000 for replacement windows from Safe Style, who also provided the finance.

First National (now GE Money Home Lending) lent the money

Commercial Union Creditor Limited administer the PPI

The PPI is underwritten by CGU Underwriting Limited

 

Who is my claim against, or is it statute barred by now?

[Consett26]

Actually, looking at the loan application, which obviously I've signed, it includes £695.85 protected payment premium so I guess I must have been told that I had to have the insurance

[dx100uk]

well GE would be your first port of call

but I doubt you'll ever get anywhere as its from 2000

 

 

they or anyone else will prob pull the string that they were unregulated.

 

 

you might get some luck if you can nail down if CGU were covered by an earlier scheme.

 

 

PPI can never be statute barred.

 

 

dx

[Consett26]

The policy schedule includes this

First National Bank PLC has undertaken to comply with the Association of British Insurers (ABI) Code of practice for the selling of General Insurance and is designated as a Company Agent for which the companies it represents accept responsibility

Although I'm not 100% certain that it gives me reasons to hope, the financial ombudsman service has this to say about the ABI code of practice (here http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/ppi/rules-codes.html#y )

 

"Association of British Insurers (ABI)

 

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) codes (which pre-dated GISC) also set out relevant requirements. For example, the ABI General Insurance Business Code of Practice for all Intermediaries (1989) (the ABI Code) said that it:

... shall be an overriding obligation of an intermediary at all times to conduct business with utmost good faith and integrity.

The ABI Code stated as one of its general sales principles that the intermediary:

... shall ensure as far as possible that the policy proposed is suitable to the needs of the prospective policyholder.

The ABI Code also included requirements about "explanation of the contract". And it said the intermediary should:

Explain all the essential provisions of the cover afforded by the policy or policies he is recommending so as to ensure as far as is possible that the prospective policyholder understands what he is buying; [and] draw attention to any restrictions and exclusions applying to the policy.

application

 

The ombudsman has noted that there is much in common between the present statutory regulatory regime and the non-statutory provisions that preceded it (and, indeed, the position at law). The non-statutory provisions no longer apply as specific requirements on those selling insurance. But the ombudsman considers they still represent a helpful guide to good industry practice."

 

 

I've asked GE for a full statement. When I get that I'll take it from there

[dx100uk]

yes abi is useful

 

 

you seem well clued up

 

 

don't give up

 

 

dx

[Consett26]

Ok,

 

 

I've got the statement through and they've helpfully included some basic details of the loan and the insurance.

 

 

Included in the insurance details are the name and address of what they call the Broker/Intermediary/PPI Selling firm.

 

 

This is given as Safestyle UK which I'm guessing means that they're going to try and argue that it was Safestyle that mis-sold the PPI not them.

 

 

Are they right and should it be Safestyle that I'm persuing rather than GE Money?

 

 

Its pointless wasting mine and GE Money's time if they aren't responsible

[dx100uk]

well under section 56 of the CCa they are responsible

 

 

however, as GE always wriggle

 

 

it might be better to hit safestyle

 

 

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.

[Consett26]

I know what you mean - path of least resistance and all that - but, as I'm trying to get money that neither organisation will want to pay I need to have as much ammunition as possible. Safestyle will just say something like "nowt to do with us, we weren't regulated and therefore aren't responsible. We have no records but you must have asked for the PPI or we wouldn't have included it therefore there's been no mis-selling". Whereas I have First National's name on the insurance certificate along with an admission that they subscribe to the ABI COP. I'm not sure which is the best way to go tactically. If it went to court who would I be suing? Safestyle & GE, Safestyle & Commercial Union, GE & Commercial Union, all three or just one?

[Consett26]

Would appreciate some tactical advice on this from others with more experience than me.

 

Safestyle mis-sold the PPI so it could be argued that my claim is against them. However, they’re going to say that they were unregulated and could therefore do whatever they wanted, caveat emptor and all that.

 

First National appear to be saying that they sold the PPI because the insurance certificate says

First National Bank PLC has undertaken to comply with the Association of British Insurers (ABI) Code of practice for the selling of General Insurance and is designated as a Company Agent for which the companies it represents accept responsibility

This is also useful to me because it says that the PPI should have been sold according to the ABI code.

 

However, reading the detail of that statement it says that they are “designated as a Company Agent for which the companies it represents accept responsibility”. The way I read that is that they are saying that any breach of the ABI code, irrespective of who broke it, is the responsibility of the company that it was representing, which, in this case was Commercial Union.

 

I appreciate that an argument can be made for all three being responsible but I’m at a loss as to who to target

[dx100uk]

I believe people have succeeded with CU and the ABI code.

[Consett26]

That highlights the difficulty in identifying who to target: In post 3 you suggested GE, in post 7 Safestyle and now Commercial Union

 

I think I will go for Commercial Union for the reasons that I outline above

[dx100uk]

where GE are involved if theres a diff routes I'd take it:lol:

 

all I'm telling you is what successes we've had.

 

safestyle are still going.

 

http://www.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-0964707606882478:652l7hswbgv&ie=UTF-8&q=safestyle+ppui&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=safestyle%20ppi

[Consett26]

Just a quickie. Commercial Union are now part of Aviva. I'm assuming that I send the claim to Aviva's head office at

Head Office

Aviva plc

St Helen's

1 Undershaft

London

EC3P 3DQ

 

Or is there a specific address for PPI complaints?

[dx100uk]

no head office will be fine.

[Mr Arrangement]

Be interested to see how you get on with this one as it may help my own case.

 

Subscribing