09 Mar 2015

A question about : Monthly Mortgage PPI claim declinded

I made a complaint about being missold ppi on a mortgage because I was self employed at the time, the policy was with a firm called MMS in Leeds and was a monthly premium. The firm who made the sale state that it was a non advised sale and it was up to me to confirm if suitable or not as they did not give any advice and just provided information. They have pointed out correctly I had no savings or way of paying he mortgage should the worst happen. I have checked the policy and it does include self employed but it looks like it would be hard to claim for the unemployment side and I am sure I have read that this could be a reason for being missold. Do you think I should take the matter to the FOS on this basis or is it end of game?

Best answers:

  • That sounds reasonable. They want a qualified person to confirm that your business has ceased trading because of insolvency and they want you to actually sign on.
    The only issue would be the underwriters having a final and binding decision. From 15 January 2005 FOS would have been able to overrule this, which suggests that the policy may predate the regulation of general insurance such as PPI.
  • That does seem a little more onerous than the norm. So, there is potential for that to work in you favour.
    Here is a FOS outcome which covers a number of the points you have made. It was rejected but in your case you may see a different outcome:
    http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.u...x?FileID=50442
    That outcome shows the all the points you raised early on this thread are things that make it suitable. Not unsuitable. However, there is a bit on the bottom of page 2 which indicates you may see a success on the onerous terms bit.
    Here are a couple that shows the more common term (involuntarily cease trading, notify HMRC and sign on): http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.u...x?FileID=58872 & http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.u...x?FileID=35065
    Here is one with a similar onerous requirement that was upheld: http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.u...x?FileID=56806
  • Question then is when you got the mortgage - pre 2005 you're going to have it dismissed as pre-regulation and FOS cannot deal with those. Post regulation depends if the broker/firm still exists - if not it'll be FSCS but not sure how easily they pay out or if they need to prove it was miss-sold first.
  • Take it to FOS. The policy terms for the self employed are unduly onerous and on these grounds present a case for complaint. In 2005 it would have been very difficult for an ordinary person to tell where advice ended and non-advised started. FOS will review the whole package of the events and paperwork leading up to the policy being sold and least you will have the circumstances independently reviewed if this is still possible depending on their current FCA status.
    If you still have doubts about the response for any complaint you should refer to FOS
  • So the bottom line is, don't trust the first response from your PPI seller and take it to FOS. I would also question if the key-facts actually got issued as a lot of these historically got lost in the post or did not find there way into the actual presentation whether advised or not
Категория: