Posted on 31 May 2010

NEW Financial Ombudsman Boss Wants Faster PPI Claims Process

Ombudsmen, like policemen, seem to be getting younger these days. Two months ago, Natalie Ceeney took up the role of the nation’s chief financial ombudsman, stepping into the well-worn, outsized shoes of Walter Merricks – who had held this role since the service was started 10 years ago.

Unlike him, she does not have a legal background and has never previously worked in financial services. But, with the breezy confidence exhibited by many former management consultants, she insists that this isn’t necessarily a disadvantage.

A quick glance at her CV shows that despite still being under 40 she has held a number of senior posts, from heading up the National Archives, to the director of operations at the British Library. So how is she hoping that these roles will help her, when it comes to adjudicating on complex critical illness insurance claims or whether someone was mis-sold a payment protection plan?

She says that as chief executive, as well as chief ombudsman, her role is largely to influence policy and shape the structure of this organisation.

“It doesn’t matter whether you are running a library, a hospital or the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). What people who use that service want is excellent service levels and that’s something I’ve always prided myself on improving.”

She points out that it isn’t her job to personally rake through every complaint received by the FOS, although some people who use the service seem to assume this is the case. “In the last 10 years my predecessor only personally adjudicated on three separate cases.”

But while most decisions will lie with the “expert team of ombudsmen” – each of whom focus on specific product areas – she says that as the chief ombudsman she will be involved in the contentious and “big decisions”.

Last week the ombudsman published its annual report, and the figures show that the volume of cases dealt with continue to soar. It ruled on about 166,000 cases – a 46pc increase on the year before. In total, the FOS receives almost one million inquiries.

Not surprising, the largest bone of contention at present is payment protection insurance, and about three in every 10 complaints are about these insurance policies that are sold alongside loans and credit cards. And there is clearly some frustration – although she refuses to name names – as to why many companies aren’t resolving these themselves, rather than letting them get to the FOS.

There are also increasing complaints about financial hardship, unsecured loans and debt collection agencies.

Ms Ceeney says that one of her main tasks is to ensure that the organisation evolves so it can operate efficiently on this scale. “If you go back 10 years we were set up as a small organisation dealing with 25,000 cases a year. This year we are expecting 200,000 cases. We need to continue modernising, improve our technology and reduce the time it takes to handle some of these cases.”

One of the biggest complaints about the service is how long it can take for cases to be settled. Improvements have been made in recent years, but many people still wait months for a judgement.

Ms Ceeney says two-thirds of claims are settled within six months, but admits that this could be improved. “By the time people come to us they have invariably been in one complaints loop or another for quite some time.” She wants a far greater proportion of claims settled within six months, and a significant proportion of these dealt with far quicker than this.

“There are always going to be a handful of complex cases that are going to take a long time to resolve, but many could be done quicker.”

She says new technology may help. “We’d like to see systems in place so people could track where their claim is, and how long it is likely to take. If the Royal Mail can do it with parcels, we should be able to do it with complaints.”

Few anticipated such a huge rise in PPI claims and although the FOS says it “expects” the number of PPI complaints to dip this year, there are no signs of this at present. “If anything, the number of complaints on this issue are speeding up, not slowing down,” Ms Ceeney says.

The FOS is also readying itself for any increase in travel insurance complaints, following the recent travel chaos caused by volcanic ash. “We don’t know whether this will be an issue yet,” she says. “Customers have to register any complaint with their product provider, and they have eight weeks to resolve the problem. Only after this can it be referred to us.”

She adds that this situation has been further complicated by consumers not knowing where to get refunds: airlines, travel insurers or credit card companies.

Looking at a longer time-frame, Ms Ceeney has also expressed concerns about interest-only mortgages, many of which were sold 10 to 15 years ago.

“People sometimes misunderstand this interest-only deal and may not realise they don’t have a repayment vehicle to pay off the debt. Our worry is in 10 years we may see a flood of complaints unless lenders warn borrowers now.”

Although Ms Ceeney is guarded about criticising individual firms, or even sectors within the financial services, there is clearly some concern about the volume of complaints now received from claims management companies.

About 80pc of all PPI claims now come from these companies – who will take a proportion (often as high as 40pc) of any payment received.

“We don’t object to people hiring someone to manage their claim,” Ms Ceeney says, ”but we want to make it clear that they do not need to and this won’t improve their chances of getting a ruling in their favour. There is no trick these companies use to ensure a complaint is upheld.

“The FOS was set up as an approachable, inexpensive alternative to the courts. People don’t need to know legal or financial jargon to lodge a claim, and all will be dealt with impartially. A lot may have changed in 10 years, but that certainly hasn’t.”

Posted on 30 May 2010

More Time To Make PPI Claims

More time has been given for 55,000 people to complain about being mis-sold payment protection insurance (PPI).

The Financial Services Authority has extended the normal six-month deadline for people to go to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) if a firm turns down their original complaint.

The temporary rule benefits those whose complaints were first rejected between 28 November 2009 and 28 April 2010.  They now have five months more to complain, until 27 October 2010.

The FSA said the measure was being put in place so that potential complainants were not disadvantaged by a delay in the regulator’s own plans to revamp the way firms are obliged to deal with new PPI complaints.

Mis-selling of PPI, which is supposed to help people meet their loan repayments if they fall ill or lose their jobs, is currently the biggest source of unresolved problems in the financial services industry.

The FOS reported recently that they accounted for 30% of all the new complaints it dealt with in 2009-10.

In September 2009, the FSA decided to get tough, ordering banks and other sellers of PPI to reopen previously rejected complaints about mis-selling of the insurance, which it now thinks could number about 500,000.

It also told firms to improve the way they dealt with new complaints.  However, implementation of its plans has been delayed because of the many objections sent in by lenders, brokers and other sellers of PPI, which are now being considered by the FSA’s staff.

The regulator still hopes to have a new set of industry rules in place by the end of this summer. But in the meantime, it wants to ensure that all those whose complaints had been rejected by firms since the end of last November will be encouraged to go to the FOS if they want to complain further.

Posted on 19 May 2010

PPI Claims And Likely Timescales

Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) claims are being settled between law firms and creditors such as banks and credit card companies. This is possibly because so many successful PPI claims have been submitted on behalf of disgruntled customers via Law firms such as Hutcheon Solicitors and the Financial Ombudsman Service that creditors see the benefit in settling claims that are presented professionally more quickly.

PPI Claim Timescale

Whilst no two PPI claims are the same Hutcheon Solicitors are advising that a likely settlement period for straightforward claims are typically in the region 0f 3 to 5 months from start to finish. To start your PPI Claim with Hutcheon Solicitors please complete our quick PPI Claim assessment form by clicking this link.

Posted on 30 May 2009

We have taken on a number of claims against Natwest Bank in respect of mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) which has been added on to a loan. Our clients are claiming the following:-

Return/Refund of the Cost of the PPI Policy

There are many claims for a refund or return of the PPI policy paid to Black Horse and to cancel the policy.

Loan to be Re-Written

To reflect the fact that the PPI policy should never have been added to the loan in the first place, that the loan should be re-written to remove the cost of the loan and to write-off all interest payments.

Loan to be Written Off

On loans taken out prior to April 2007, there is a possibility that if the PPI was not optional, the entire loan together with the PPI and all interest could be written-off and refunded.

CLAIM NOW

If you think you have a claim take our 1 minute test by clicking on the link below.

Natwest Bank PPI Claim Form Click Here

We operate a NO WIN NO FEE policy so you have nothing to lose to refund your PPI.

 

If you answer Yes to one or more of the following questions you may have a claim for PPI refund -

  • Natwest failed to ask me about any pre-existing medical conditions when I took out a PPI policy
  • Natwest failed to ask if I was or was shortly due to become self-employed when I took out the PPI policy
  • Natwest failed to ask if I was retired or very close to retirement ages when I took out the PPI policy
  • Natwest failed to ask if I was not employed (including student) when I took out the PPI policy
  • Natwest failed to ask if I was a public services employee when I took out the PPI policy
  • Natwest failed to ask if I had other protection policies in place when I took out this loan
  • Natwest failed to advise me that  I did not need the PPI policy as I could have repaid the loan/outstanding balance using my savings
  • Natwest failed told me that the PPI policy was compulsory and not optional
  • Natwest failed to ask if I was not aware that the PPI policy was optional
  • Natwest failed advise me that I would get a better interest rate or the PPI would cost much less if I took the PPI policy out with another insurer
  • Natwest did not make me aware of the cost of the premiums on the PPI policy
  • Natwest did not make me aware that the PPI policy cost would be added to the loan and I would pay interest on the cost
  • Natwest did not make me aware that I had taken out the PPI policy when I took out the loan
  • Natwest did not make me aware that I could purchase alternative PPI policies with other providers when I took out the loan
  • Natwest did not make me aware that the PPI policy did not cover the life of the loan

Natwest Bank PPI Claim Form Click Here

 

Further Guidance

For more information on how to make a claim click here.
For more information about mortgage repossessions click here.

R James Hutcheon Solicitors
The Heath Business & Technology Park
Runcorn
Cheshire
WA7 4QX

Visit our main Web site www.hutcheonlaw.co.uk

This Firm is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority

 

PPI Claim Refunds

There are a number of claims against Natwest Bank along with other major and respected lending institutions who are alleged to have been mis-sold PPI policies linked to a loan.

PPI is usually a “secondary purchase” to a loan or mortgage borrowers are taken by surprise when confronted with a PPI advice and just go along with the sale that they must or ought to have PPI to protect them.  The borrower is not given time to think about alternative methods of protection or whether they really do need the PPI policy.  The PPI sold along side a loan or mortgage are often single premiums added to the loan amount which is expensive to the borrower as it means that the borrower is paying interest on the cost of the PPI premium over the full term of the loan.  PPI premiums are often loaded with commission payments making the cost of the policy even more expensive, with small print exclusions and cancellation penalties thousands of PPI policies have been mis-sold.  We are making PPI refund claims against Natwest Bank along with other major lenders on behalf of our clients as in all the circumstances it was not considered that Natwest Bank treated their own customers fairly.  If refunds are not made we will always consider taking court action if appropriate to ensure our clients are not financially prejudiced by the sale of the PPI.  Natwest Bank often respond to us by saying that the PPI has not been mis-sold.  These claims are being considered very carefully and court action may be pursued where there is a denial.

A review of PPI mis-selling has been considered by the Financial Services Authority “FSA” which does not make good reading to the industry as a whole.  Many respected Banks and lenders have been fined due to the fact that they do not have appropriate systems and controls in place to ensure that their customers are treated fairly.  With large commissions and bonuses paid on the sale of the PPI policies lenders often fail to monitor whether the PPI policy has been mis-sold.  It is the borrower who pays at the end of the day either through the monthly repayments towards the loan or mortgage or when a claim is rejected against the PPI policy.  The Competition Commission has also investigated the sale of PPI policies.  For further reading please click here.

Obviously not every PPI policy has been mis-sold and indeed if sold correctly would offer valuable protection.  Every case must be individually considered on its merits.  Each case is “fact sensitive” which means that as PPI refund claims solicitors we will be reliant upon what our client has said in evidence about how the PPI policy was sold in order for us to consider making a PPI refund claim.  With documentary evidence in support and on occasions, the telephone recording of the sale, will provide us with a complete picture on how the PPI policy was sold.  Obviously if the lender has been fined by the FSA this will help support a refund of the PPI policy. 

When an event such as redundancy, loss of a job, illness or accident occurs the borrower only then finds out that the PPI policy is worthless due to exclusion clauses such as a failure to declare pre-existing medical conditions.   Whilst the Financial Industry is now cleaning up its act there are still the historic PPI policies that have been sold which are costing many borrowers substantial sums for something at the end of the day are bits of worthless paper.

We are often asked what can be reclaimed or refund against the likes of Natwest Bank and other lenders.  The starting point in law is that the borrower must be put back into the same financial position as if the PPI was never sold.  This means the return of all PPI payments made to lenders such as Natwest Bank plus interest on the payments made. In addition the remaining PPI cost plus interest be waived and the loan re-written so that the future payments under the loan or mortgage reflect the reduced costs.  In more severe cases where PPI was sold as a “compulsory purchase” or that the borrower had “no choice” but to take out the PPI policy alongside the loan there is also a chance that the loan itself can be written off.  This is due to the Consumer Credit Laws which protect borrowers if there has been a breach of minimum requirement criteria.

Court Action – Defending Customers

In addition to taking action for refunds of PPI policies we are also acting for clients who have been taken to court by their Banks because they have fallen behind with their monthly repayments.  In some cases we are defending repossession proceedings taken by lenders where a borrower has lost their job or was unable to claim a refund against the PPI policy due to a pre-existing medical conditions.

Mortgage Repossessions

We are able to offer support and ongoing advice in these types of claims all on a “NO WIN NO FEE” basis where there has been a mis-sold PPI policy linked to a mortgage or secured loan.  Access to justice and legal representation should be a right and not a privilege.  Unfortunately in many cases of this nature the borrower is unable to afford to appoint a solicitor to defend and counter claim.  As solicitors we understand the stress and strain of repossession proceedings and the build of debt.  But since the law has changed making it possible for specialist solicitors like R James Hutcheon to act for free it is now possible to instruct us without fear of getting into any more debt.

Expert legal advice on repossession claims where PPI has been sold along side the mortgage or secured loan can mean not only obtaining a full refund of all PPI but it could mean that the entire loan could no longer be valid if the PPI was mis-sold and breached the prescribed terms of the Consumer Credit Act.  A complete defence could be made out.  The advice is not to suffer in silence and contact R James Hutcheon solicitors on a NO WIN NO FEE basis.  There is nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Visit our main Web site www.hutcheonlaw.co.uk

We are taking on claims against all the main high street banks lenders for mis-selling PPI claim and refunds including Alliance & Leicester, Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank, BlackHorse Finance, Halifax, HSBC Bank, Egg, First Plus, Lloyds Bank, Natwest Bank, Picture Loans, Natwest Bank to name but a few.

Mortgage or Second Charges?

Payment Protection Insurance is commonly sold as part of obtaining a mortgage. The lender often wants to protect themselves in case the borrower is unable to meet the repayments due to some unfortunate event.  But again there has been widespread mis-selling of PPI linked to a mortgage or second charge so the borrower has no protection under the PPI policy and may face possession proceedings.

The added burden of the cost of the PPI policy on top of mortgage or a second charge often means that the repayments cost much more than initially thought. This is a large burden and often contributes to the borrowers failing to keep up their repayments.

Just like any single premium PPI policy added to a loan, a PPI policy added to a mortgage or second charge can also be refunded and claimed back if it was mis-sold.

 

Posted on 30 May 2009

We have taken on a number of claims against Royal Bank of Scotland in respect of mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) which has been added on to a loan. Our clients are claiming the following:-

Return/Refund of the Cost of the PPI Policy

There are many claims for a refund or return of the PPI policy paid to Black Horse and to cancel the policy.

Loan to be Re-Written

To reflect the fact that the PPI policy should never have been added to the loan in the first place, that the loan should be re-written to remove the cost of the loan and to write-off all interest payments.

Loan to be Written Off

On loans taken out prior to April 2007, there is a possibility that if the PPI was not optional, the entire loan together with the PPI and all interest could be written-off and refunded.

CLAIM NOW

If you think you have a claim take our 1 minute test by clicking on the link below.

Royal Bank of Scotland PPI Claim Form Click Here

We operate a NO WIN NO FEE policy so you have nothing to lose to refund your PPI.

If you answer Yes to one or more of the following questions you may have a claim for PPI refund -

  • RBS failed to ask me about any pre-existing medical conditions when I took out a PPI policy
  • RBS failed to ask if I was or was shortly due to become self-employed when I took out the PPI policy
  • RBS failed to ask if I was retired or very close to retirement ages when I took out the PPI policy
  • RBS failed to ask if I was not employed (including student) when I took out the PPI policy
  • RBS failed to ask if I was a public services employee when I took out the PPI policy
  • RBS failed to ask if I had other protection policies in place when I took out this loan
  • RBS failed to advise me that  I did not need the PPI policy as I could have repaid the loan/outstanding balance using my savings
  • RBS failed told me that the PPI policy was compulsory and not optional
  • RBS failed to ask if I was not aware that the PPI policy was optional
  • RBS failed advise me that I would get a better interest rate or the PPI would cost much less if I took the PPI policy out with another insurer
  • RBS did not make me aware of the cost of the premiums on the PPI policy
  • RBS did not make me aware that the PPI policy cost would be added to the loan and I would pay interest on the cost
  • RBS did not make me aware that I had taken out the PPI policy when I took out the loan
  • RBS did not make me aware that I could purchase alternative PPI policies with other providers when I took out the loan
  • RBS did not make me aware that the PPI policy did not cover the life of the loan

Royal Bank of Scotland PPI Claim Form Click Here

Further Guidance

For more information on how to make a claim click here.
For more information about mortgage repossessions click here.

R James Hutcheon Solicitors
The Heath Business & Technology Park
Runcorn
Cheshire
WA7 4QX

Visit our main Web site www.hutcheonlaw.co.uk

This Firm is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority

PPI Claim Refunds

There are a number of claims against Royal Bank of Scotland along with other major and respected lending institutions who are alleged to have been mis-sold PPI policies linked to a loan.

PPI is usually a “secondary purchase” to a loan or mortgage borrowers are taken by surprise when confronted with a PPI advice and just go along with the sale that they must or ought to have PPI to protect them.  The borrower is not given time to think about alternative methods of protection or whether they really do need the PPI policy.  The PPI sold along side a loan or mortgage are often single premiums added to the loan amount which is expensive to the borrower as it means that the borrower is paying interest on the cost of the PPI premium over the full term of the loan.  PPI premiums are often loaded with commission payments making the cost of the policy even more expensive, with small print exclusions and cancellation penalties thousands of PPI policies have been mis-sold.  We are making PPI refund claims against Royal Bank of Scotland along with other major lenders on behalf of our clients as in all the circumstances it was not considered that Royal Bank of Scotland treated their own customers fairly.  If refunds are not made we will always consider taking court action if appropriate to ensure our clients are not financially prejudiced by the sale of the PPI.  Royal Bank of Scotland often respond to us by saying that the PPI has not been mis-sold.  These claims are being considered very carefully and court action may be pursued where there is a denial.

A review of PPI mis-selling has been considered by the Financial Services Authority “FSA” which does not make good reading to the industry as a whole.  Many respected Banks and lenders have been fined due to the fact that they do not have appropriate systems and controls in place to ensure that their customers are treated fairly.  With large commissions and bonuses paid on the sale of the PPI policies lenders often fail to monitor whether the PPI policy has been mis-sold.  It is the borrower who pays at the end of the day either through the monthly repayments towards the loan or mortgage or when a claim is rejected against the PPI policy.  The Competition Commission has also investigaged the sale of PPI policies.  For further reading please click here.

Obviously not every PPI policy has been mis-sold and indeed if sold correctly would offer valuable protection.  Every case must be individually considered on its merits.  Each case is “fact sensitive” which means that as PPI redund claims solicitors we will be reliant upon what our client has said in evidence about how the PPI policy was sold in order for us to consider making a PPI refund claim.  With documentary evidence in support and on occasions, the telephone recording of the sale, will provide us with a complete picture on how the PPI policy was sold.  Obviously if the lender has been fined by the FSA this will help support a refund of the PPI policy.

When an event such as redundancy, loss of a job, illness or accident occurs the borrower only then finds out that the PPI policy is worthless due to exclusion clauses such as a failure to declare pre-existing medical conditions.   Whilst the Financial Industry is now cleaning up its act there are still the historic PPI policies that have been sold which are costing many borrowers substantial sums for something at the end of the day are bits of worthless paper.

We are often asked what can be reclaimed or refund against the likes of Royal Bank of Scotland and other lenders.  The starting point in law is that the borrower must be put back into the same financial position as if the PPI was never sold.  This means the return of all PPI payments made to lenders such as Royal Bank of Scotland plus interest on the payments made. In addition the remaining PPI cost plus interest be waived and the loan re-written so that the future payments under the loan or mortgage reflect the reduced costs.  In more severe cases where PPI was sold as a “compulsory purchase” or that the borrower had “no choice” but to take out the PPI policy alongside the loan there is also a chance that the loan itself can be written off.  This is due to the Consumer Credit Laws which protect borrowers if there has been a breach of minimum requirement criteria.

Court Action – Defending Customers

In addition to taking action for refunds of PPI policies we are also acting for clients who have been taken to court by their Banks because they have fallen behind with their monthly repayments.  In some cases we are defending repossession proceedings taken by lenders where a borrower has lost their job or was unable to claim a refund against the PPI policy due to a pre-existing medical conditions.

Mortgage Repossessions

We are able to offer support and ongoing advice in these types of claims all on a “NO WIN NO FEE” basis where there has been a mis-sold PPI policy linked to a mortgage or secured loan.  Access to justice and legal representation should be a right and not a privilege.  Unfortunately in many cases of this nature the borrower is unable to afford to appoint a solicitor to defend and counter claim.  As solicitors we understand the stress and strain of repossession proceedings and the build of debt.  But since the law has changed making it possible for specialist solicitors like R James Hutcheon to act for free it is now possible to instruct us without fear of getting into any more debt.

Expert legal advice on repossession claims where PPI has been sold along side the mortgage or secured loan can mean not only obtaining a full refund of all PPI but it could mean that the entire loan could no longer be valid if the PPI was mis-sold and breached the prescribed terms of the Consumer Credit Act.  A complete defence could be made out.  The advice is not to suffer in silence and contact R James Hutcheon solicitors on a NO WIN NO FEE basis.  There is nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Visit our main Web site www.hutcheonlaw.co.uk

We are taking on claims against all the main high street banks lenders for mis-selling PPI claim and refunds including Alliance & Leicester, Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank, BlackHorse Finance, Halifax, HSBC Bank, Egg, First Plus, Lloyds Bank, Natwest Bank, Picture Loans, Royal Bank of Scotland to name but a few.

Mortgage or Second Charges?

Payment Protection Insurance is commonly sold as part of obtaining a mortgage. The lender often wants to protect themselves in case the borrower is unable to meet the repayments due to some unfortunate event.  But again there has been widespread mis-selling of PPI

Accident at work compensation claims click here

No Win No Fee

Child injury compensation claims click here

Posted on 27 May 2009

Black Horse Finance Ltd

We have taken on a number of claims against Black Horse Finance in respect of mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) which has been added on to a loan. Our clients are claiming the following:-

Return/Refund of the Cost of the PPI Policy

There are many claims for a refund or return of the PPI policy paid to Black Horse and to cancel the policy.

Loan to be Re-Written

To reflect the fact that the PPI policy should never have been added to the loan in the first place, that the loan should be re-written to remove the cost of the loan and to write-off all interest payments.

Loan to be Written Off

On loans taken out prior to April 2007, there is a possibility that if the PPI was not optional, the entire loan together with the PPI and all interest could be written-off and refunded.

CLAIM NOW

If you think you have a claim take our 1 minute test by clicking on the link below.

Black Horse PPI Claim Form Click Here

We operate a NO WIN NO FEE policy so you have nothing to lose to refund your PPI.

 

If you answer Yes to one or more of the following questions you may have a claim for PPI refund -

  • Blackhorse failed to ask me about any pre-existing medical conditions when I took out a PPI policy
  • Blackhorse failed to ask if I was or was shortly due to become self-employed when I took out the PPI policy
  • Blackhorse failed to ask if I was retired or very close to retirement ages when I took out the PPI policy
  • Blackhorse failed to ask if I was not employed (including student) when I took out the PPI policy
  • Blackhorse failed to ask if I was a public services employee when I took out the PPI policy
  • Blackhorse failed to ask if I had other protection policies in place when I took out this loan
  • Blackhorse failed to advise me that  I did not need the PPI policy as I could have repaid the loan/outstanding balance using my savings
  • Blackhorse failed told me that the PPI policy was compulsory and not optional
  • Blackhorse failed to ask if I was not aware that the PPI policy was optional
  • Blackhorse failed advise me that I would get a better interest rate or the PPI would cost much less if I took the PPI policy out with another insurer
  • Blackhorse did not make me aware of the cost of the premiums on the PPI policy
  • Blackhorse did not make me aware that the PPI policy cost would be added to the loan and I would pay interest on the cost
  • Blackhorse did not make me aware that I had taken out the PPI policy when I took out the loan
  • Blackhorse did not make me aware that I could purchase alternative PPI policies with other providers when I took out the loan
  • Blackhorse did not make me aware that the PPI policy did not cover the life of the loan

Black Horse PPI Claim Form Click Here

 

Mortgage or Second Charges?

Payment Protection Insurance is commonly sold as part of obtaining a mortgage. The lender often wants to protect themselves in case the borrower is unable to meet the repayments due to some unfortunate event.  But again there has been widespread mis-selling of PPI linked to a mortgage or second charge so the borrower has no protection under the PPI policy and may face possession proceedings.

The added burden of the cost of the PPI policy on top of mortgage or a second charge often means that the repayments cost much more than initially thought. This is a large burden and often contributes to the borrowers failing to keep up their repayments.

Just like any single premium PPI policy added to a loan, a PPI policy added to a mortgage or second charge can also be refunded and claimed back if it was mis-sold.

Further Guidance

For more information on how to make a claim click here.
For more information about mortgage repossessions click here.

R James Hutcheon Solicitors
The Heath Business & Technology Park
Runcorn
Cheshire
WA7 4QX

Visit our main Web site www.hutcheonlaw.co.uk

This Firm is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority

 

PPI Claim Refunds

There are a number of claims against Black Horse Finance along with other major and respected lending institutions who are alleged to have been mis-sold PPI policies linked to a loan.

PPI is usually a “secondary purchase” to a loan or mortgage borrowers are taken by surprise when confronted with a PPI advice and just go along with the sale that they must or ought to have PPI to protect them.  The borrower is not given time to think about alternative methods of protection or whether they really do need the PPI policy.  The PPI sold along side a loan or mortgage are often single premiums added to the loan amount which is expensive to the borrower as it means that the borrower is paying interest on the cost of the PPI premium over the full term of the loan.  PPI premiums are often loaded with commission payments making the cost of the policy even more expensive, with small print exclusions and cancellation penalties thousands of PPI policies have been mis-sold.  We are making PPI refund claims against Black Horse Finance along with other major lenders on behalf of our clients as in all the circumstances it was not considered that Black Horse Finance treated their own customers fairly.  If refunds are not made we will always consider taking court action if appropriate to ensure our clients are not financially prejudiced by the sale of the PPI.  Black Horse Finance often respond to us by saying that the PPI has not been mis-sold.  These claims are being considered very carefully and court action may be pursued where there is a denial.

A review of PPI mis-selling has been considered by the Financial Services Authority “FSA” which does not make good reading to the industry as a whole.  Many respected Banks and lenders have been fined due to the fact that they do not have appropriate systems and controls in place to ensure that their customers are treated fairly.  With large commissions and bonuses paid on the sale of the PPI policies lenders often fail to monitor whether the PPI policy has been mis-sold.  It is the borrower who pays at the end of the day either through the monthly repayments towards the loan or mortgage or when a claim is rejected against the PPI policy.  The Competition Commission has also investigaged the sale of PPI policies.  For further reading please click here.

Obviously not every PPI policy has been mis-sold and indeed if sold correctly would offer valuable protection.  Every case must be individually considered on its merits.  Each case is “fact sensitive” which means that as PPI redund claims solicitors we will be reliant upon what our client has said in evidence about how the PPI policy was sold in order for us to consider making a PPI refund claim.  With documentary evidence in support and on occasions, the telephone recording of the sale, will provide us with a complete picture on how the PPI policy was sold.  Obviously if the lender has been fined by the FSA this will help support a refund of the PPI policy. 

When an event such as redundancy, loss of a job, illness or accident occurs the borrower only then finds out that the PPI policy is worthless due to exclusion clauses such as a failure to declare pre-existing medical conditions.   Whilst the Financial Industry is now cleaning up its act there are still the historic PPI policies that have been sold which are costing many borrowers substantial sums for something at the end of the day are bits of worthless paper.

We are often asked what can be reclaimed or refund against the likes of Black Horse Finance and other lenders.  The starting point in law is that the borrower must be put back into the same financial position as if the PPI was never sold.  This means the return of all PPI payments made to lenders such as Black Horse Finance plus interest on the payments made. In addition the remaining PPI cost plus interest be waived and the loan re-written so that the future payments under the loan or mortgage reflect the reduced costs.  In more severe cases where PPI was sold as a “compulsory purchase” or that the borrower had “no choice” but to take out the PPI policy alongside the loan there is also a chance that the loan itself can be written off.  This is due to the Consumer Credit Laws which protect borrowers if there has been a breach of minimum requirement criteria.

Court Action – Defending Customers

In addition to taking action for refunds of PPI policies we are also acting for clients who have been taken to court by their Banks because they have fallen behind with their monthly repayments.  In some cases we are defending repossession proceedings taken by lenders where a borrower has lost their job or was unable to claim a refund against the PPI policy due to a pre-existing medical conditions.

Mortgage Repossessions

We are able to offer support and ongoing advice in these types of claims all on a “NO WIN NO FEE” basis where there has been a mis-sold PPI policy linked to a mortgage or secured loan.  Access to justice and legal representation should be a right and not a privilege.  Unfortunately in many cases of this nature the borrower is unable to afford to appoint a solicitor to defend and counter claim.  As solicitors we understand the stress and strain of repossession proceedings and the build of debt.  But since the law has changed making it possible for specialist solicitors like R James Hutcheon to act for free it is now possible to instruct us without fear of getting into any more debt.

Expert legal advice on repossession claims where PPI has been sold along side the mortgage or secured loan can mean not only obtaining a full refund of all PPI but it could mean that the entire loan could no longer be valid if the PPI was mis-sold and breached the prescribed terms of the Consumer Credit Act.  A complete defence could be made out.  The advice is not to suffer in silence and contact R James Hutcheon solicitors on a NO WIN NO FEE basis.  There is nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Visit our main Web site www.hutcheonlaw.co.uk

We are taking on claims against all the main high street banks lenders for mis-selling PPI claim and refunds including Alliance & Leicester, Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank, BlackHorse Finance, Halifax, HSBC Bank, Egg, First Plus, Lloyds Bank, Natwest Bank, Picture Loans, Royal Bank of Scotland to name but a few.

Posted on 27 May 2009

HFC Bank Ltd (HFC)

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has fined HFC Bank Ltd (HFC) on 16.01.08 £1,085,000 for failing to take reasonable care to ensure that the advice it gave customers to buy Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) was suitable, and for failing to have adequate systems and controls for the sale of PPI.

The FSA found against HFC Bank Ltd (HFC) that as a result of HFC’s inadequate systems and controls:

  • it did not have effective systems to train and monitor its staff and failed to ensure that its procedures    for monitoring sales staff effectively identified and investigated potentially unsuitable sales;
  • management information provided to HFC’s senior management was not sufficient to enable them to identify problems with the sale of PPI; and
  • its records were not sufficient to demonstrate its sales were suitable.

For more information on HFC Bank Ltd (HFC) see the FSA Web Site:

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2008/004.shtml

CLAIM NOW

If you answer Yes to one or more of the following questions you may have a claim for PPI refund -

  • HFC failed to ask me about any pre-existing medical conditions when I took out a PPI policy
  • HFC failed to ask if I was or was shortly due to become self-employed when I took out the PPI policy
  • HFC failed to ask if I was retired or very close to retirement ages when I took out the PPI policy
  • HFC failed to ask if I was not employed (including student) when I took out the PPI policy
  • HFC failed to ask if I was a public services employee when I took out the PPI policy
  • HFC failed to ask if I had other protection policies in place when I took out this loan
  • HFC failed to advise me that  I did not need the PPI policy as I could have repaid the loan/outstanding balance using my savings
  • HFC failed told me that the PPI policy was compulsory and not optional
  • HFC failed to ask if I was not aware that the PPI policy was optional
  • HFC failed advise me that I would get a better interest rate or the PPI would cost much less if I took the PPI policy out with another insurer
  • HFC did not make me aware of the cost of the premiums on the PPI policy
  • HFC did not make me aware that the PPI policy cost would be added to the loan and I would pay interest on the cost
  • HFC did not make me aware that I had taken out the PPI policy when I took out the loan
  • HFC did not make me aware that I could purchase alternative PPI policies with other providers when I took out the loan
  • HFC did not make me aware that the PPI policy did not cover the life of the loan

If you think you have a claim take our 1 minute test by clicking on the link below.

Quick PPI Claim Form - Click Here

We operate a NO WIN NO FEE policy so you have nothing to lose to refund your PPI.

R James Hutcheon Solicitors
The Heath Business & Technology Park
Runcorn
Cheshire
WA7 4QX
View Larger Map

Posted on 15 May 2009

A No Win No Fee PPI Legal Reclaim Service

You have nothing to lose.  We are expert Solicitors helping people like you claim back mis-sold PPI policies. If we are unsucessful you do not pay us anything.

GET HELP NOW - CLICK HERE

Thousands of PPI policies have been mis-sold for various reasons. If you have been sold a Payment Protection Insurance policy linked to a loan use our contact form, call us for FREE 0800 083 0626 or engage our live online confidential chat facility (see top right hand side of this web site).

CAN I CLAIM?

To find out more on whether you are eligible please click here.

COMPANIES FINED FOR MIS-SOLD PPI POLICIES

The Financial Ombudsman Service has undertaken detailed investigations into the mis-selling of PPI policies. There are various companies who have been fined, for details click here. If you have been sold a PPI policy from one of the companies or one that is not listed we would be happy to advise you on a possible claim.

R James Hutcheon Solicitors
The Heath Business & Technology Park
Runcorn
Cheshire
WA7 4QX
View Larger Map

This Firm is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
Bookmark This Website

Posted on 17 September 2008

Payment Protection Insurance

Although you may not know exactly what PPI is - you should, because there is a fair chance that you have it (20 million PPI policies exist in the UK).

What’s more, there’s a fair chance you were mis-sold it, and could reclaim your money back. As many as two million people may have been mis-sold policies since 2003.

This quide explains if you can get any money back, and how to go about it. Click on the links to our contact page that will help you make your claim (read more on this below).

Payment protection insurance, or PPI, is the insurance that is sold alongside loans, credit cards, store cards and debt products like car finance agreements, that is supposed to cover the repayments if you can’t make them.

If you can’t make the payments because of an accident or illness that means you can’t work, or if you are made redundant, PPI is supposed to step in and cover the payments for a period.

So what’s the problem?

The problem is firstly that PPI bought from a lender is extremely poor value for money, with any potential benefits far outweighed by the huge cost.

Secondly, PPI is very often sold to people that can never claim on it. The terms are tightly drawn so that most of the instances where people hope to claim are not covered. Most policies don’t pay if you are:
- Self-employed
- Retired

Or stop work because of:
- A medical condition you weren’t asked about
- Stress or back problems

Only one in five claims on PPI are successful. There has also been evidence of firms forcing customers to buy it, wrongly claiming it’s compulsory when it isn’t or refusing to give a quote without it. There are even cases where the insurance has been added without the permission of the customer.

In the worst cases, already expensive PPI is paid for up front and the money to pay for it is added to the loan you are taking out. This way of selling PPI, known as ’single premium’, means that you end up paying interest on the cost of the insurance. When customers go to cancel the insurance they are told that it cannot be cancelled without recalculating the entire loan.

What is being done?

Thankfully, it’s not just This is Money that has spotted the problems with PPI. Both the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Services Authority are investigating. The FSA has bolstered the rules that sellers must follow. If they don’t stick to these rules, customers can reclaim their money.

Can I reclaim on any PPI policy?

Your claim for compensation is dependent on when you took the insurance. PPI sales only came under the jurisdiction of the FSA in January 2005. Any sales made before then are not covered by the latest rules.

However, it may still be worth complaining to your lender if you feel you have been mis-sold. If you bought before January 2005 it is likely that they will have been covered by a previous regime of rules. This means that the Financial Ombudsman Service will be able to consider these complaints.

If you took PPI after January 2005, your claim is subject to the latest rules.

Payment Protection Claims Website by
PPI Claims and Refunds - This firm is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
Accident At Work Compensation Claims Solicitors LED Mood Lights and Mood Lighting Site Map