According to the Sunday Post, it has uncovered that banks are finding it difficult to refund every single PPI they mis-sold to consumers. Procuring data from a UK thinktank, they said banks continue to use the “excuse” of “not finding the applicant’s PPI details” when dealing with consumer PPI claims.
The Alliance of Claims Companies shows in its data that lender Blackhorse has increased its use of this excuse by 80% in April compared to the 0% this excuse was used early January.
Other banks have begun to reject consumer complaints for the same excuse past August 2016.
ACC Chief Simon Evans said there is “no doubt this is just the latest delaying tactic the industry has come up with” and that this information indicates the UK’s banks are finding it difficult to repay consumer refunds.
This comes as pessimistic news following the FCA’s positivity that the PPI claims deadline set on August 29, 2019 would work. FCA Chief Andrew Bailey said a deadline would urge consumers to make a claim. This information indicates consumer groups were correct; that banks and lenders have yet to improve their PPI refund investigation and services.
The ACC is a representing body of different UK claims management companies (CMC) all opposed to the PPI claims deadline. Mr Evans said their members do not charge upfront fees and it is not in their “economic interest to submit claims without any chance of succeeding.”
Bank employees indiscriminately mis-sold PPI to ineligible consumers, which is almost half the UK’s consumer population. As the deadline looms closer by 2019, consumers are likely to pile up in the banks’ call centres and the Financial Ombudsman in addressing their complaints. Here are three difficulties they could likely encounter.
Delayed Bank Decisions
Banks could either indiscriminately reject complaints without proper investigation or hold the PPI refund decision further than three months. Banks are disallowed to do either of these, but concerning yourself with bank violations rather than getting your refund can be disheartening.
Returning To File Your Complaint
It takes time to collect all your information, inform your bank about your possible mis-sold PPI and walk your entire claim against your bank. To do this again after an unjust rejection would take time and resources. Do not be discouraged; continue to file your complaints or forward your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.
Collecting All Your Data
For £10, you could ask banks through a data access request for all your transactions regarding your financing and the insurance products attached to it. This is helpful should it be the case your financial documentation is incorrect or lacking. Claims management companies could also do this on your behalf and your entire claim on a no win no fee basis.
In conjunction with its controversial PPI claims deadline, the Financial Conduct Authority’s appointed media strategist, M&C Saatchi, would have Arnold Schwarzengger and other Hollywood stars to take up the messenger role to discuss payment protection insurance and thrust the knowledge into television viewers.
According to AOL, Arnold, along with other Hollywood stars, have become “unexpected faces of finance.” It said that George Cole, Iggy Pop, Kerry Katona, Martin Clunes and Stacey Solomon, actors famous during the 90s era of action films, music and other media.
Arnold is said not to take on an active role but rather, do a voiceover of an advertisement. The advertisement is said to help people recall him from Total Recall. The idea was to use the film’s former premise and connect this to customers trying to recall whether or not they were mis-sold payment protection insurance.
In March, the Financial Conduct Authority had announced it would set a PPI claims deadline by 29 August 2019 and would use a consumer communications campaign to help announce to people they are due compensation for a mis-sold insurance policy they cannot use. The UK banking industry had mis-sold the insurance policy deliberately as it pushed employees to mis-sell the insurance for better bonuses and incentives.
PPI or payment protection insurance wrongly sold to consumers merits a hassle and for this fiscal hassle lasting for decades, consumers have a right to claim compensation aside from their refunds. Bank employees and financial advisers have hassled consumers by mis-selling them an insurance policy they believed could be useful and while the risk of having to use PPI has passed upon the borrower’s loan conclusion, they could have faced hassles that they may need compensation for.
PPI refunds are calculated by calculating the fixed amount paid for a year and the regular interest rate added to the fixed amount for the financial product. PPI refunds, especially single premium ones, are built into the borrower’s approved loan and repayments for the insurance product increases at a regular rate similar to the borrowed amounts.
For PPI compensation, the PPI refund amount that includes the compound interest stated earlier by adding the 8% value of the PPI policy on top of the withdrawn PPI refund value. In this way, Banks refund and provide consumers provisions for the hassle caused by the product.
Paying for a financial product that serves no purpose is truly impractical and troubling. You are owned more than just your repayments; you are also owed the time and money you would have wasted for PPI.
This year might be your first time hearing from your lender that you have a payment protection insurance policy. The bad thing is, you do not remember whether you did consciously purchase the PPI policy during the time you applied for your loan, mortgage or credit card. If this is the case, these three signs can help you point out whether you were mis-sold your insurance policy — and these tips are still effective for 2017.
They Said It Was Compulsory
If your bank employee told you it was compulsory to go with your loan application and you purchased it in goodwill, then you were mis-sold this insurance policy. Consumers have the right to choose their insurance provider to protect their financing.
If your partner already has coverage for at least a single financing as his or her work permits and you do not need a redundant payment protection coverage, the bank employee should never recommend you purchasing an insurance policy for your financing.
Any policy sold through this context is mis-sold.
Susan Plevin’s case became a landmark because her financial adviser did not tell her about the commission he or she received. This had the UK Court penalize Paragon Finance for their failure to mention a “substantial” commission above 50% of the original value of the insurance policy. Your financial adviser and bank employee must disclose this high commission to consumers they have successfully urged to purchased the insurance.