Jump to content


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1806 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

I have made a claim through Barclays as I believe I was mis-sold on several credit cards and loans,

they have accepted on of these was mis-sold and paid me £1893,

 

 

I received a letter from them today stating that another one was not mis-sold as the application was done in the branch

and I would therefore have agreed to the PPI, as the application in the branch dates back to 1997

 

 

I am not sure how they could prove this,

is this likely to be a way of them getting out of accepting it was mis-sold and not paying me,

and should I tell them I want this reinvestigating as I want proof that this was sold in branch and I agreed to this

Link to post
Share on other sites

prob done in a closed room with a manager that wanted to line his pockets with the commission he made from selling the PPI.

 

 

what was your mis selling reason?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

my reason was I was young at the time, in perfect health, had a well paid job at a very secure company so had no need for the ppi as would never need to make a claim on it

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main thing I wanted to know is if anyone else has had a similar response from Barclays and what did they do about it, or should I call their bluff and ask them to prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you had ample sick cover?

 

 

being young and stupid is no reason for them to refund PPI.

 

 

and sadly its for you to prove it not for them not too.

 

 

and in 1997 they'd say they were all non advised sales unless you have proof otherwise?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea he advised you to take out ppi else you wouldn't get the loan!

 

 

but you cant prove it.

 

 

have you sent them an sar and gotten all the data

 

 

or did you simple send a speculative letter hoping for a win.

 

 

were any of the other successes from the same period with them?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
my reason was I was young at the time, in perfect health, had a well paid job at a very secure company so had no need for the ppi as would never need to make a claim on it

 

This isn't a valid complaint reason. Insurance is there to protect you from UNEXPECTED mishaps. None of us have a crystal ball. There is nobody who is immune from a sudden illness and there are any number of blue chip companies that have either suddenly gone bust or decided to restructure and let staff go. If you had a serious pre-existing illness which was excluded and would have seriously restricted you from claiming then that might have been grounds for complaint. Likewise if you had reason to think you were going to be made redundant that would be grounds for complaint as the policy wouldn't have covered you. But insurance being taken out to cover someone who is healthy and in employment against a sudden unexpected change in circumstances is not misselling. It's simply prudent.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...