Get Expert PPI Claims Advice

  • Friendly, well trained advisers
  • No up front costs
  • Strictly no win no fee*
Fill out the Form below ...

A Tool For PPI Claims Inquiries

As with all bank accounts today, it would be wise for claims management companies and related industries to develop a PPI claims inquiry application or tool.

The tool would allow the cross-referencing of known PPI information from different banks.

However, CMCs do not have the necessary arrangements with almost all banks to allow the development of this particular software. But if built, it could be the solution to the issue of consumer groups calling for postponing with PPI.

The database can host all PPI policies in the United Kingdom wherein a user could search his or her name in the database to verify if they have a mis-sold PPI policy.

However, all security issues must be resolved. Having consumers enter their bank account numbers or records in unsecure servers can mean trouble as scammers and hackers could intercept this information and use it to their advantage.

A government-sanctioned body could develop the system and give it the necessary permissions and safeguards to ensure the security of the system.

It may also help the elderly and sick get back their PPI refunds quicker than having someone do it for them and filing all their paperwork in place. It is also a better alternative to the FCA’s planned advertising campaign.

FCA Calls For Further Evaluation of Plevin v Paragon and Feedback for PPI Complaints

According to the Financial Conduct Authority, overall, the package of previous proposals would be taken forward including the re-scheduled PPI deadline on June 2019.

The statement comes in its issued feedback statement and consultation about payment protection insurance.

The FCA also advised changes to the proposed PPI rules and guidance on handling PPI complaints. The FCA heavily considers the decision of the Supreme Court during the Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance case.

Susan Plevin, who took out a £32,000 loan from Paragon Personal Finance, purchased from a broker payment protection insurance. As the court deemed the broker’s commission to be ‘quite large’ the broker must disclose the amount to the client.

The lack of a signature or validation of recognition by the consumer of the commission, the 72% of the £5,780 cost of payment protection insurance Susan Plevin paid should be returned to her immediately.

Causes for debate include the actual threshold of mis-sold PPI.

Plevin said her broker did not tell her how much the amount was or which company received the amount. However, she knew the amount of commission paid with her PPI policy.

Mis-sold PPI has a total of £32bn to be repaid to consumers by almost all UK banks.

Stay Vigilant Towards Packaged Bank Accounts

Almost every UK household has a TV cable subscription and a high-speed Internet connection at home. But if households were to use the Internet connection to watch movies or favourite series compared to TV, then it would be best to lay off the television to cut costs.

If it is not needed, it is better dealt away with. While it may sound like a proverb, many consumers are locked-in their deals because of their terms and conditions.

But what if these terms and conditions were unfair from the beginning?

Packaged bank accounts paid for by consumers on a monthly basis do not seem to provide the benefits they promised. It could include travel insurance, breakdown cover and even additional payment protection insurance if you ever take out financing.

From March 2015 and 2016, the Financial Ombudsman Service had surveyed more than 44,000 new cases, double of its amount the previous year. Most consumers complained about not knowing the benefits of their accounts. Some said they were not led to read the terms and conditions properly or was added without their knowledge or consent.

The issue is consumers who do not find their added PBA perks useful or are ineligible for such are eligible for a payment protection insurance complaint. Consumer groups encourage consumers who may have a grudge with their PBA to consult with their banks. Consumers may also consult with claims management companies to see if their PBA could work for them.

Stay vigilant with the £120 yearly fee you pay for your PBA perks. Read your terms and conditions and consult with your bank to know if you really can use the PBA perks to your advantage.

Else, like TV vs Internet, you’re better off having one over the other.

The Three Differences Between PPI Claims and Direct Redress

We’ve been asked many times what is the difference between payment protection insurance claims and direct redress.

We can’t blame you; the signals sent out by other PPI claiming services might mean that direct redress and actual mis-sold PPI refunds are similar.

But not at all are they any identical.

You Only Get Refunds from PPI

A mis-sold PPI claim reclaims ALL your repayments from a mis-sold PPI policy. Here is a short post that pertains to everything about claiming for your PPI refunds.

When we say all, it means we use our special arrangements with high-street banks and other affiliate banks to look into your previous records and ascertain each and every repayment you’ve made for your payment protection insurance policy.

Yes, we go beyond the six-year limit.

Direct Redress Gets You More

Citing the case of ‘Roberta’ a London businesswoman, she was mis-sold PPI on two of her credit cards. She had been self-employed during the time her bank approved her credit cards and mis-sold her PPI at the same time.

Roberta has earned about £32,000 for both her PPIs. Part of the total is from her repayments. Another part is due to her direct redress.

Direct redress is the amount the PPI policy incurs whenever your debt increases. As single premiums are variable depending on your current total, it becomes a complex calculation to get the compound interest you paid for your premiums as well.

A Special Arrangement

To get ALL your refunds and direct redress from your bank, you will need to go beyond the six-year limit. Consumers must provide a data access request letter to their bank and this is still subject to their approval. Once approved, the consumer or their representative can investigate on records kept beyond the six-year period.

It may go beyond more than 10-15 years worth of repayments especially for mortgage payment protection insurance policies.

RBS Loses £2bn for Payment Protection Insurance

The Royal Bank of Scotland reports up to £2bn in losses for the first half of the year. About £1.3 billion of the fund goes to PPI and other legal costs.

PPI refunds receive about £450 of the allocated amount. The amount is to cover its possible administrative costs for processing PPI once the FCA approves the move of the deadline to June 2019.

RBS’ losses had significantly increased from  £179 billion the previous year. According to analysts, it shows the crucial impact of its £1.2bn repayment to the Treasury as part of its journey returning to the private sector.

RBS CEO Ross McEwan said the bank is now in a proper position to support consumers.

“We are clearly in phase two of our strategy, where our focus is on drawing a line under many of the legacy issues that have plagued this bank, and transforming the core business so we can deliver consistent, sustainable profits and results for our shareholders and do great things for our customers,” he said.

“This progress is important because it means we are well positioned to support our customers through the challenges that an economic slowdown poses for the country,” Mr McEwan added.

But he also warned the UK’s Brexit could have detrimental effects on their company profits.

“The outcome of the UK’s EU referendum has created considerable uncertainty in our core market and we continue to assess all its implications.

“In the current low rate and low growth environment, achieving our longer term cost:income ratio and return targets by 2019 is likely to be more challenging.”

The chief executive also appeared to address Bank of England governor Mark Carney’s warning that banks have “no excuse” to stop lending following the decision to cut interest rates and launch a package of measures to support bank lending.

“We have been the fastest-growing large UK bank – with net lending into the UK economy higher than any other bank in the first half of the year. We are open for business, ready to lend, and ready to play our part in this new chapter for the country,” Mr McEwan said.

Financial Ombudsman Possibly Facing Legal Action Over PPI

The United Kingdom’s champion for consumer justice faces legal action after a claims management company had found it guilty of rejecting consumer PPI claims over credit cards. The case would guarantee a judicial review over its handling of complaints for PPI.

The anonymous CMC is preparing its High Court case against the Financial Ombudsman. The CMC claims that the FOS had held back about £85m consumer redress for 50,000 people rejected by the Financial Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman is the next stop for PPI claims when banks reject it or consumers believe banks did not provide proper compensation.

For most High Street banks, the FOS had judged 70% in favour of consumers. The accusations come timely over the higher rate of its inclination to judge claims not in favour of consumers since 2015 the previous year.

Banks have been paying out more than a million every quarter during its profit reviews. Much to the disappointment of investors, many banks — except for Lloyds — had announced additional inventory for their PPI refund packages.

PPI claiming is set to end in January 2019. The Financial Conduct Authority decided to move it at a later date to satisfy all sides concerned with the PPI issue. Consumer groups are still disappointed with the City watchdog’s decision.

Three Ways To Guarantee Success In Reclaiming Your PPI Refunds

The Financial Ombudsman Service may have moved the PPI deadline further back from the spring of 2018 to June 2019 but it does not mean things have gone a lot easier.

This is the primary complaint of Which? and other consumer groups: the lack of simplification for payment protection insurance processes.

Consumers only have to do three things to succeed effectively with PPI claims.


Understand How You Were Mis-Sold

Employees cannot force retirees and self-employed to purchase PPI to get a loan application. This is an unfair and unscrupulous tactic to sell financial products. If you were forced — or told — that PPI is a product necessary to go along with any loan, mortgage or credit card, it is not. If you weren’t told you could consult for a PPI with your own insurance company, you were mis-sold PPI.

PPI Isn’t Defective

PPI is a truly effective product. It protects your loan repayments for one year after it is activated. It has not failed and all insurers and banks honour it upon request and fulfilment of requirements.

Because of its mis-selling, PPI has become a notorious product not because it was failing to do its job but because it could not do its job given the consumer’s eligibility is questionable due to the controversial manner it was sold.

All the Papers

It would take all your paperwork to prove that you were mis-sold PPI. Understand your rights as a consumer when claiming for your insurance. You are eligible for refunds if you could prove that you have a PPI and it was mis-sold because you were sick, already retired or self-employed during the time of purchase.

Make sure to prove that your bank employee understood your occupation before selling you the insurance policy.


RBS Loses £2Bn To PPI

The Royal Bank of Scotland reports a £2.04bn loss for the early half of 2016 after repaying PPI and other legal costs amounting to more than £1.3bn

The taxpayer-backed bank also had to repay more than £630mn in restructuring costs. An undisclosed amount the bank had paid for its bailout package. RBS is 73% taxpayer-owned.

RBS’ loss had increased to £179m the previous year and analysts estimate the amount to rise even further the following year.

According to CEO Ross Mc Ewan, RBS is still “well-positioned” for a potential economic slowdown.

He said: “We are clearly in phase two of our strategy, where our focus is on drawing a line under many of the legacy issues that have plagued this bank, and transforming the core business so we can deliver consistent, sustainable profits and results for our shareholders and do great things for our customers.”

“This progress is important because it means we are well positioned to support our customers through the challenges that an economic slowdown poses for the country,” Mr McEwan added.

UK’s high-street banks are concerned that PPI bills can increase as the Financial Conduct Authority delayed the PPI deadline from the promised 2018 spring deadline to June 2019.

The biggest PPI mis-seller in the UK, Lloyds Banking Group, said it was disappointed as the industry would need to repay more respectively for their PPI refunds.

However, Lloyds had more efficient figures during its half-year report. It did not report any further additional repayments for its existing PPI bill.

Banks Can See Further PPI Repayments After Deadline Extension

The Financial Conduct Authority’s promise of a spring 2018 PPI deadline would impossibly come to pass. As banks continue to add further funding for their PPI refund packages, analysts estimate more would be needed specifically for administrative fees before the possible June 2019 deadline.

Investors speculating the new deadline would escalate the total PPI bill further from the £30bn threshold it is currently situated in.

According to Lloyds Banking Group — the biggest PPI mis-seller in the country — it was disappointed with the deadline’s extension. However, the group said the number of complaints had fallen rapidly. During its half-year reports, the bank did not announce any addition to their PPI refund package.

The FCA would use a £42.2m advertising campaign to spread awareness of PPI mis-selling. Banks would fund the campaign to ease their expenses from scammers ripping off consumers with unofficial claims services.

Consumer groups still complain that the longer deadline is a band aid solution to the PPI crisis. They said banks need to simplify the claims process for faster transactions and avoid delaying or outright rejecting valid consumer complaints for payment protection insurance.

FCA Chief Executive Andrew Bailey hopes the deadline would draw a line under the scandal once and for all.