Just read the thread PF and I can totally understand what you feel for your border. Glad she is getting well. She is loved, needed and wanted and will know that. xxx I read that borders will actually be out working sheep and can break their legs and carry on. Its only when the farmer gets home and the dog starts to limp he knows that something is wrong. They are so brave, loyal and faithful. Mine follows me everywhere. He is my shadow.

Just an update seen as though I have slated Direct Line so far. I had my loss adjuster out from UK assistance and how different they were. My claim is being honoured and its only one claim too and I was told to get a quote for the full suite. I have actually done this now and sent it in and although they are not paying for everything naturally they are paying a good wack of it. I have been told today a cheque is on the way to me for the amount we agreed and when the work is done they will send the VAT seperately. All in all, well done to UK Assistance so far. Just waiting for the cheque now but hopefully this will all go smoothly.

I have this in my policy with Direct Line 4 We will not repair or replace undamaged items which are part of a set or suite unless they are part of a bathroom suite or fitted kitchen and the damaged parts cannot be repaired or an exact replacement found. BUT still having problems with my obsolete bathroom replacement. THEY TOLD ME who would contact me about my toilet and I was called by their right hand man who runs an obsolete bathroom place. He told me that my policy entitled me to an exact colour replacement only and the fitting at the bottom may be different (as different toilets are) so that if I had to replace the floor (maybe digging into the concrete as its an old s trap fitting) that was my look out. I then called direct line back and was also told the same that exact match actually meant like for like or just colour (where a bathroom was concerned). My bath is also damaged and I told them that and they have now put it as a different claim as I told them about it. I only mentioned it cause I was just making an example that I would not have claimed for "just" the bath that has two chips in the bottom UNLESS the toilet had not been cracked but they said that this would be another claim and also another excess. I then said that as they could not find an exact toilet match (or bath as the bath is definately obsolete - we found it out 15 years previous but have recently found out that if was cast iron and imported from Holland and not been on sale for the last 50 years!!) we should be, as the policy entitles us to, a complete suite replacement. They have said not but I have a loss adjuster coming out on Tuesday. I was told by TWO direct line advisors that a like for like could be found and anything that I have to do is called consequnetial damage??? If the toilet is a different shape its fine but the colour will match. If I have to dig into the contrete and get the s trap re positioned that is my look out. I thought exact meant just that, exact???

Hi, thanks for that. I would have liked for a loss adjuster to come out from the minute I submitted the claim. I have nothing to hide. I begged them to send someone out so that they could see what I mean about the concrete etc. It is not a matter of just going to b and q and replacing a toilet!! I am definately complaining about this and how I have been treated and left with our toilet like this now. We cannot replace cause we don't want to invalidate the claim. I would stay with friends first. I am only asking for what my policy entitles me to.

I wondered if anyone would care to give any views on this, good or bad. I feel that I followed their claims procedure correctly and have been treated unfairly or is it me?? Just bumping. Thanks for anyone that takes the time to read and give a view.

I have a bathroom suite that is obsolete and we have lived here for 15 years. Our toilet has a hairline crack that was first noticed at Christmas when I knocked it with the hoover and then the other day I thought it was dog hair on the front face and infact the crack had grown all the way round and it seemed to be seeping a small amount of water. Was not too sure if it was actually condensation TBH but still only a small amount so I rang the insurance. I told them about it and THEY TOLD me that I would be called by their appointed obsolete bathroom people. I got a phone call from this man Philip Jordan and was told that he could find a toilet in my colour. I then asked if it was exactly the same being the fitting size at the bottom and he stated all he had to match was the colour. I then argued that if the fitting needed to be changed (as this was a s trap fitting) and we lived in a bungalow this would mean cutting into concrete (as we went into this 15 years ago) and also it would mean a new floor so I then said I would call Direct Line back as my bath also has a hole in it. My policy actually states that if an "exact" match cannot be found or repaired then in the case of a bathroom suite they would replace the lot. I then called Direct Line and stated what Philip Jordan had said in that the toilet may not be the exact match of the bottom and if it mean't that we were having to dig into the concrete or alter the flooring (which we only did two years ago) then I would think that it would be better to replace the suite as our bath was damaged about a month ago where there is a hole in it but near the top end. She then said do you want to claim for your bath, I said I would have no need to claim for the bath as you cannot get an exact match toilet and this should warrent a complete suite according to your terms and conditions. She then said that exact meant a colour (the same as Philip Jordan had said) and that any flooring alterations would be consequential loss. I then said that I would now make a claim for the bath as they were leaving me no choice. She then said that would be TWO excess's and also two claims. I told her that if she went as per DL's policy there would be no need to for two seperate claims. Anyway I thought if this is what I have to do then I would have no choice. I was "then" told that I could ring around some obsolete places myself OR get a quote for a white toilet and bath but seperate ones and to get two for each. I rang a plumber who came the day after. He took some measurements and said that it would be OK but as our bath was on 650mm wide it was not standard so if we had a smaller sink and moved the toilet back (which he said would mean going into the floor concrete perhaps (would not know until they took the old toilet out) we would then fit a normal size (well as normal as can be as we can only fit a maximum 1600mm length in too!!) bath in which is 700mm width. I also spend all afternoon emailing all the obsolete bathroom places with details of my replacement items and also prices and each one came back saying that no-one would be able to get a 650mm width bath. I also was told by philip Jordan (direct lines right hand man) that this bath would not be got from anywhere cause it did not exist. He said my measurements must be wrong. I then photographed the bath holding a tape measure from the middle of the taps (as he had stated) and it measured 32.5 and also across the full width which measures 650mm. Later that evening I got a reply from a lovely gentleman saying that it was unfair to say they were non existant and that he had come across these baths on an estate in Welling Kent and they were cast iron (like ours is) but had not been on merchanable for over 50 years. He said I would not get one but at least he put my mind at rest that they did exist as I thought I was going mad. The next day I was getting annoyed about the insurance and kept reading the terms about saying if they cannot get an exact match (which does not state just colour) then they would replace a whole bathroom suite so I rang them again. After lots of arguing that I should not have two claims registered if they took the first claim as they could not replace exact and I could get ahead with getting the toilet replaced in white. She then said a loss adjuster would be appointed and be in touch within 24/48 hours. I was relieved to say the least. Last night late we had the pleasure of syphoning all the water out of the loo and putting on mastic as the leak was getting worse and we had to all use the bucket. By morning it was OK again and we have flushed today and its not leaking now but I rang the insurance again and asked them if they could rush the loss adjuster as it was bank holiday weekend and we needed the toilet doing asap. The lady I spoke to this time then told me that my claim now had gone to be validated???? I said you had told me yesterday that a loss adjuster was coming out and would be in touch and she said that was a mistake and it had now gone to this validation department. I was told it would be there for about 5 days and that it was also bank holiday weekend and if it was validated then they would get a loss adjuster to get in touch. She then said she had spoken to Philip Jordan. I said that he had tried to make out my bath did not exist and I was quite happy for someone to come out to measure as it DID measure 650mm and I had it confirmed that these were in existance but no longer around even with obsolete bathroom places. My bath is cast iron too. I told this lady that yesterday when I spoke to the girl (LISA) who had sent the claim to this "validation" department I argued with her because she used the words "Like for Like" and my policy did not mention LIKe for LIke but it mentioned "exact". She then said the same, it actually means like for like. I then argued that my toilet was our only toilet and she said nothing she could do until the claim was released back to them. I then said I would get a subject access from them and also make a complaint to FOS and she said she would be back and to hold on. (Regardless now I am doing both the above). She came back on the line and said she had now reopened the claim and that she would get a loss adjuster to be in touch by Tuesday next week. What are my rights where exact match is concerned and what can I do that they have suspected fraud on our claim (as I googled this). I actually asked for someone to come out to assess this in the first place. I was so annoyed that they were leaving this up to me to sort TBH and also the fact that I was told yesterday a loss adjuster would be calling in 24/48 and then they never let me know anything. Also they say "exact" match means colour or like for like. Is it me here and do I sound to you like I am committing fraud? I certainly am not and will making my complaint with FOS immediately regardless of the outcome of this. If they passed it to validation (although they now say its back open whatever that means) will this be on my records and also it looks like I have two claims when only ONE claim should have been sufficient for them to replace the whole suite. They did replace the cistern about 6 years ago and they did not get an exact match and where they smashed some tiles taking it off they actually just put lots of filler in. I feel like a criminal for making a claim that was and is genuine. I would never have claimed just for the bath as its cast iron and usuable but they left me no choice. The hole is very noticable too but that would not have made me think of changing the whole suite but if we are going to maybe have to dig the floor up anyway and change the trap then it seems daft to do it for another obsolete suite. They cannot get an exact bath (NO WAY AT ALL) and they cannot guarantee an exact toilet. I have been in tears today and last night with frustration. They are lovely when you are buying the policy but come making a claim and you are treated like a criminal.

Did you know they are based in GIbraltar. They were not regulated here in the UK at the time and that is why Freedom say prior to regulation of insurance Bespoke sold the policies. They will say that Freedom only acted as a processor for Bespoke and Bespoke will no doubt write back (if they do reply) and say that they sold it fairly. Its a bummer really. By the way I am a stokie too.

I do pop back to see how you are going on and I hate to think of you sitting up at night doing your nut in. You need to be careful cause of your health. I hope you can get things sorted in your mind.

Pompey, So sorry you are not anywhere closer to working out your redress but thought this post here may help When you have an older loan its worked out using rule 78 in the settlement. If you are being redressed by the bank and being put back into the position as if you never had the PPI it works like this. Take my 2002 Loan Loan amount was £8100 PPI was £2588.84 Total £10688.84 Put these figures into the calculator http://brian-stewart.orpheusweb.co.u...ualr78-prr.htm I made 19 repayments of 168.52 outo of the orginal 84 repayments due Put his in this calculator gives a settlement figure of £8933.90 which was exactly what is on my statements but I did not actually pay this amount as it was split between £7471.97 (my actual settlement) and 1461.93 which was a rebate against the insurance. Now put in just the £8100 without the PPI and the repayments were split between £40.69 being PPI and 127.83 being against the loan so you put in 127.83 as the repayment amount and also 19 repayments as before. The settlement comes out at £6772.13 The difference between the two is £699.84 and then add what we made in repayments back to that £773.11(being 19 x 40.68) and that totals £1472.95 and that is what they are repaying to me and then adding the statutory interest on to that. My redress wording was this Calculate the amount the customer made in total i respect of their oeverall loan inc. any fees, penalties , as well as interest and repayments reflecting and premium rebates alowed on cancellation of the PPI policy. Calculate the amount the customer would have paid had the original loan been taken without the additional borrowings to fund the PPI, but assuming it was settled on the same date (including any fees and penalties as well as interest and repayments. Pay the customer the difference between the two plus interestat 8% per annum from the date the loan was redeemed to the redress payment date. I don't know if any of your loans were in the old Rule 78 period but thought it may be of help. If its not then feel free to ignore.

I am just relieved that they have fast tracked this for you. Your body is asking you to relax and take it easy me thinks so try to listen. Any help we can give we will pompey. I am always over the road.

So pleased for you Pompeyfaith. Its such good news... I also have hypertension. Its amazing how much these things affect us. I have had another eye bleed this weekend. Try to let the adjudicator deal with it now and take a breather. Its not worth your life.

Good luck pompeyfaith...

You can download the complaints form online and fill it in and then send it by post I think. Thats what I did... Let us know how you get on..

Pompeyfaith, I just wanted to let you know I have now accepted the figures that the co-op have quoted as I have now backed them all using the calculator for the rule of 78 here and they are spot on really. I know this is a knockback and I thought I was due more back but here it is in black and white. Loan amount was £8100 PPI was £2588.84 Total £10688.84 Put these figures into the calculator http://brian-stewart.orpheusweb.co.u...ualr78-prr.htm I made 19 repayments of 168.52 outo of the orginal 84 repayments due Put this in this calculator gives a settlement figure of £8933.90 which was exactly what is on my statements but I did not actually pay this amount as it was split between £7471.97 (my actual settlement) and 1461.93 which was a rebate against the insurance. Now put in just the £8100 without the PPI and the repayments were split between £40.69 being PPI and 127.83 being against the loan so you put in 127.83 as the repayment amount and also 19 repayments as before. The settlement comes out at £6772.13 The difference between the two is £699.84 and then add what we made in repayments back to that £773.11(being 19 x 40.68) and that totals £1472.95 and that is what they are repaying to me and then adding the statutory interest on to that. I have three loans that are being redressed and each one is CORRECT and I am not due anything more back from them. I really thought it was more and have made a fool of myself for arguing this with the FOS:confused: but I now see where they are coming from here. Just thought it was best to let you know. Perhaps you can look into yours the same. Its very simple to do..

Time will tell I am sure. I have challenged these redress's and am now waiting for the FOS to get back to me. Lets hope its soon but was told today by my adjudicator that he has passed my comments onto the co-op and if need be this can then go before the Ombudsman. i know this takes time but its £2300 short of my figures so cannot let it go by. Will keep you all informed when I get a reply.

I have today written to the adjudicator about my redress amounts. There were 4 loans and they have redressed on 3 or the 4 as myself or them do not have the details of the 4th one. They have supposedly put me back into the position as if I never had the PPI and put 8% simple interest onto the amount from the date of settlement to date now. (which I know is not the best method but I do accept) I have received the amounts they are redressing on these loans today and find them all wrong. I have worked these back and taken the actual loan and whatever repayments were made against the loan (taking the repayments of the PPI off the repayments!!) and then calculated on the rule of 78 calculator and I get the difference being the amounts that I wanted from them and what they are offering me so from what I can tell they actually charge the PPI interest in the settlement of the accounts. I have had a chance to prove my figures to which I have done today and will let you know the outcome. The FOS did agree with the co-op but after sending them my figures they have said they have sent them onto the co-op for them to look into and that "they were just what they needed". Lets hope the FOS agree with me here and I will keep you posted.

This is the way that I was taught on how to work out how much is due back if MISSOLD You first take the amount of the PPI and interest, then you take off whatever payments you have made against the PPI and then take off the REBATE received when you settled the loan. This figure is then added back to the payments made and then the 8% statutory interest is added on. I have a complaint in with the FOS about the co-op at the moment and the wording of my redress is completely different to the wording of the redress that Pompey is getting. Mine goes like this · Calculate the amount the customer paid in total in respect of their overall loan, including any fees and penalties, as well as interest and repayments and reflecting any premium rebates allowed on cancellation of the PPI policy; · Calculate the amount the customers would have paid in total had the original loan been taken without the additional borrowing to fund the PPI, but assuming it was settled on the same date (including any fees and penalties, as well as interest and repayments); Pay the customer the difference between the two plus interest at 8% per annum simple from the date the loan was redeemed to the redress payment date I hope this helps you pompey!!! I note that you are not putting in your calculations the rebates you received against the PPI. These amounts are on the statements that usually come in your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request). Edit Just had my redress figures from the Ombudsman and mine are totally wrong too. They have failed to address the interest charged on the PPI at settlement. I have written back to the adjudicator and done a complete breakdown using the rule 78 calculator as if we never had the PPI at all and it works back to within £10 difference. I have noted to the Ombudsman that these firms are NOT redressing the loans correctly at all. I will let you know my outcome here.

I had a dissolvable(yeah right!!) stitch left in mine for over 6 years... I Kept getting an absess over the root canal tooth and then eventually this blue plastic stuff stuck out of my gum and it was the stitch. By the time I got to the dentist it had come out and left a hole which I still have now. Trouble is is was xrayed numerous times on this and suffered about 4 more absess's in that time. They were not bothered in the slightest.

For the sale of the PPI Firstplus should of been members of GISC and mine was taken out before they became members and for the unfair rebate they have to have been FSA registered and they were not until 2005 so my settlement was 2003 so outside their jurisdiction as well. There is always Barclays Group PLC trading as Firstplus though

Was assigned an ajudicator for mine with the FOS on Friday of last and then monday received a letter saying "sorry outside our jursidiction" about my settlement in 2003. They told me that anything prior to Jan 2005 when firstplus became within their jurisdiction is not anything they can look at. extract from my letter after being told it was something they could look at. (actually got assigned an adjudicator as well) After further research, i am sorry to have to tell you, however that it seems to me that your complaint is not one that we are actually able to deal with. The types of complaint we can look into are set down in the rules under which we operate. The rules say that the events complained about (i complained about unfair settlement and rule 78) are not covered by our service because Firstplus Financial Group PLC was not included within our jurisdiction until 14th January, 2005. Your complaint seems to be outside the rules because you obtained the loan in 2000 and repaid it in 2003 so both events occurred prior to Firstplus Financial Group PLC becoming within our jursidiction. Just thought i would let you know this. I complained some months ago and actually got assigned an adjudicator last week and received this on monday just gone. It may happen to you although not for certain but be warned.

I would. How much was the loan for??? If it was under £25K then they ARE allowed to use it if the agreement was pre 2005. If it was over £25K then they should not. http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/consumer_credit/oft192v2.pdf

I will keep watching. My complaint is with FOS awaiting an adjudicator which should be soon but i do know they have requested everything from FP already. Good luck

thanks

Hi, Braveheart, glad your're moving along with this. What have you based your claim on with the FOS. I have got a complaint going with them about the "settlement" although my loan was just under 25K so it was regulated but they are checking things out for me. I sent in my claim about 3 to4 weeks ago and all i know is that they have requested things from Firstplus. My loan was in Jan 2000 but they are still looking into things so far. Good luck with FOS.

I may have to do that myself. Mine is with the FOS and they are checking for me. I think rule 78 is so unfair and its abolished now (although they can still use until may 2010 on older agreements) and i think what is unfair now was unfair then. rant over