*Diabetes* Santander refuse claim on 'non-advise' basis

[Tenmen10]

Hi guys,I've got a few PPI cases going one of which I have won & will give details on later BUT the same letter which got me a positive result (through MBNA) ) have also been refused with a different lender/insurer Santander)so I'll post the negative first as I may need to clear these hurdles in future and it seems pointless to get people copying details of my good result and ending up in the 'poo'.

 

First things first my claim is based on the fact that I am an insulin dependent Diabetic of 34 years so I had a pre-existing medical condition and would not have been able to claim if problems arose through this.If you don't suffer from any such condition then you may be best stopping now, if you do read on (be warned its a long one)

 

My claim letter is as follows - Dear Sir/Madam,Account : Debenhams xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx I took out a Debenhams store card in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .It was closed in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. At the same time, I was sold a payment protection policy. I believe I was mis-sold the insurance policy on this card. I have a longstanding medical condition but your staff did not ask me about my medical history. I was not warned that previous medical conditions could be excluded.I am an insulin dependent Diabetic and have been so for 34 years. Therefore, under the terms of the policy, I would not be covered if I found myself unable to meet my credit card repayments.

 

Your salesperson did not point out to me that I would not be covered by the policy. If they had done this, I would not have taken out the policy.Companies selling insurance policies must make sure that the policy they are selling is suitable for the customer's needs. The policy I was sold is quite clearly unsuitable for me because I am a Diabetic and have been for 34 years including at the time of my application to open this account.I now contend that I was mis-sold this policy.

 

I claim back all the premiums andInterest I have paid in connection with this payment protection insurance policy plusStatutory interest at 8% (or whatever other rate the courts might order) from the firstpayment that I made until the date of your settlement of this claim.I would like a reply as soon as possible but, in any case, within the eight weeksallowed for responses to complaints by the Financial Services Authority.yours faithfully

 

TenMen10On the 9th May 2012 I received a (very quick) reply -Dear Mr TenMen10Thank you for your letter received 18th April 2012. I understand that your complaint is regarding the mis-selling of PPI.I can confirm that PPI was applied when you opened your account in store on 22nd February 1997. I have enclosed a copy of the Credit Agreement for your reference, which shows that you have requested insurance.I can confirm that on the agreement you signed it required you to tick if you required the PPI, which you did.

 

Therefore it appears that it was made clear that the policy was optional and that you elected to take out the insurance.Once a customer has decided to take the product, a policy summary and policy document is mailed to the customer to review. We also offer a 30-day no-quibble guarantee wher the product may be cancelled, and any premiums refunded (subject to no claim being made).

 

This allows time to compare the policy to that of any other insurance companies.Since you opened your account this insurance has been showwn on all statements, when a balance has been outstanding and could have been cancelled or a claim made at any time.As to ascertaining personal information from the customer to determine their suitability, this is not an advised sale onder the FSA's ICOB regulation. We have always given the details of the policy and let the customer make an educated decision if the policy is suitable for them.In your letter you have advised that you were no asked if you suffered fron a pre-existing medical condition.

 

However pleasse understand that having an illness prior to the the cover being taken does not exclude you from the you from the insurence this simply may mean that you cannot claim for this condition in the furture. This info is clearly detailed in your policy, additionally this is the only one aspect of the policy and you would have still been covered by other benefits of the insurance.

 

Whist I can appreciate that this may may not be the outcome you were expecting, I trust that i have addressed all opf the issues all of the concerns that you raised. If you remain dissatisfied you may refer to the FLA (eic etc).............

 

Now, assuming you haven't nodded off yet do any of you guys reckon I'm worth continuuing?It seems a pretty thorough reply and I must admit covers everything. I've had a look around on the CAG and other site and I'm chasing my tail a bit and ready for giving up.Advice??

[dx100uk]

any chance you can use the EDIT button the msg above [in the bottom bar] and add some blank lines please

so's its not a big block of txt?

 

 

 

dx

[Conniff]

Gosh - can't read that lot, needs paragraphing.

[rebel11]

Paragraphs added, Please add paragraphs in future:-)

[dx100uk]

std fob off reply

 

write back stating you do not agree with the assumptions made

 

he was not there and cannot reliably comment.

 

dx

[Tenmen10]

Hi guys,not sure whats going on here but I can't seem to put spaces or place my nonsense into a paragraph its just coming out as my original thread did. Dx100uk, I can't seem to find an EDIT button for my original post either. Never had these issues before!

[Conniff]

Your ability to edit will have expired. When making a post, try doing it after clicking 'Go Advanced' and see if that makes a difference also if you are using Internet Explorer, try clicking on the 'Compatibility View' button up by the address line:

 

[Tenmen10]

Hi all,

 

for those of you who have managed to read my rather untidy earlier attempt at explaining my problem with Santander I hope to do better this time.

 

Although Santander referred me to the FLA I have decided to put my points across to Santander first to give them an opportunity to reconsider. Whether this is brave or stupid I'll let you decide but I'll post my response on here first and see if any of the Mods or other 'helpers' can spot anything I should put in or take out. . . . or even suggest I don't bother with Santander,

 

Here goes -

 

 

Dear Madam,

 

Ref: Debenhams Account Number – xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

SantanderRef - xxxx

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated 9th May 2012. I have read your reply and before passing my complaint to the FLA I will first make some points in response to those you made.

 

The copy of the Credit Agreement does show my signature and it does show a tick at the side of the Payment and Purchase Protection paragraph. The tick was not placed on the Agreement by myself the ticks and crosses on the Credit Agreement were placed on there by the Debenhams staff member who was serving me. I was not consulted at the time of signing this Agreement regarding the PPPI although it may ‘appear so’ to yourself.

 

As you were not there you are only assuming that I was consulted and therefore cannot reliably comment. Indeed, the FSA fined GE Capital in January2007 for failing to have adequate systems and controls for selling insurance which includes PPI and for failing to treat its customers fairly. Since my Agreement was signed in 1997 before tighter regulations were brought in I fail to see how GE Capital’s PPI controls were adequate at the time I signed the Agreement.

 

Although I accept there are differences between “advised” &“non-advised” sales the Financial Ombudsman has stated that ‘exclusions relating to pre-existing conditions are significant and so need to be highlighted in all “advised” and “non-advised” sales. It is not enough to simply remind the customer to read the policy and cancel it within the cooling–off period, the exclusion should be drawn to the consumer’s attention before they are committed to buying it’. The onus WAS and is still on the financial business to highlight exclusions relating to pre-existing conditions.

 

There is also the point that telling me about exclusions relating to a pre-existing condition is not advising or giving an opinion but informing me of the facts relating to my suitability. If I had been told that my Diabetes MAY have prevented a claim should my condition warrant it, I would not have taken out this policy. The fact that it is only one aspect of the policy and I would have been covered by other benefits of the insurance really does belittle the possible seriousness of Diabetes particularly Type 1 of which I have sufferedfor 34 years. Any illness I may suffer in the (hopefully distant) future will be affected to some degree by Diabetes; I MUST bear this in mind when taking out any insurance policy.

 

I have explained my concerns regarding your recent decision to decline my claim, I would ask you take time to reconsider. If you choose to continue your present course of action I will then take matters up with the relevant authorities.

 

You have two weeks from receiving this letter with which to reconsider you decision,

 

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Tenmen10

 

By the way, this acoount was opened up in 1997 and from reading on this and other sites it seems Santander are a hard nut to crack there does not seem to be a lot of success with them but surely they can't get away with it forever?!

 

Good luck to everyone else & thanks to the CAG site, fantastic!

 

regards

 

Tenmen10

[dx100uk]

no they cant

 

agreed keep it up!!

 

dx

[Tenmen10]

Hi everyone,

 

I need to find some proof of employment from way back in 1991.

 

At that time I was with an Agency (Manpower) doing temporary work for 25 hours a week. I was based over the road at a company where Manpower have an office.

 

The Manpower representative currently on site does not have any details of my employment back then, only a more recent stint there in 2009/10.

The Manpower Head Office in Leeds has no record whatsoever due to the fact I was employed by Manpower at the one site for my 'career' with them (the one above). The lady at the Head Office seemed to think I would have no problem getting this information but if the info is not there I may have to take another route.

 

The reason I need this info is for a PPI claim, at the time I took out a Burtons store card with PPI I was working for Manpower on a temporary basis and had been for 3-4 years. The Santander representative I spoke with says I need to provide proof I was working on a temporary basis at this time before my claim can be looked into!

 

I've requested my employment/NI payment details from the HMRC though I do not know whether this specify's what type of employment I had.

 

Does anyone out there have any other avenues I may follow?

 

thanks in advance,

 

regards

 

Tenmen10

[citizenB]

I would have thought that they should have checked your employment details prior to actually offering you the credit card ? However, I have asked if there is any other way you can obtain this information, or indeed if it is actually required.

[dx100uk]

wat?

 

i dont really think there is any need for that info.

 

satans bank are throwing you a curve ball to put you off

and give them and excuse to not cough.

 

ideally you should not be using the phone either.

 

how have you made this claim??

 

FOS CQ+SOC+covering leter?

 

dx

[dx100uk]

ah you already have a thread...

 

now...

 

cant see how satans bank can refuse the diabetes issue

 

just becaue it was 'non-advised'

 

others have coughed so should they

 

what makes you think they'll do any diff once they know your employment status?

 

dx

[Emmzzi]

20 years is well outside the period anyone needs to retain records for.

[Tenmen10]

Right ladies & gents,

 

I was actually filling in an FOS questionnaire regarding the above Santander claims (Burtons & Debenhams storecards) as both were turned down despite my Pre-existing medical condition. While filling it in one of the tick boxes asks whether my employment was full/part-time and I realised my Burtons account was opened while still at school and doing temporary work.

 

dx100uk, although I realise phoning is not recommended I took the name of the person I spoke with as well as the time and date, I also made sure she was aware of the fact. The 5 minute call informed me that although working the 25 hours a week I was doing (crap grammar I know) is covered, the fact I was temporary would have to be looked at again. She did say proof would be needed though, which seems fair enough, if not I could claim anything and they would just pay up. Its just an extra stick to hit them with and I thought I would ask some questions first. Plenty of people have been knocked back and I want to cover all bases before continuuing.

My original claim was placed by letter I'm looking at going the FOS route now, I was told to ring the FOS back when I made my mind up!

 

Emmzzi, I didn't realise there was a time constraint though one of the Manpower reps told me there is no reason why they shouldn't have some info on record. Unfortunately, her colleague at the site I worked at has said they have nothing from that time.

 

I have this morning phoned the FOS regarding another claim (Barclays) and the Gent I spoke to said that a claim like mine where I have Diabetes would, without going into specific details, be upheld by the FOS though it could take up to 12 months. He started a claim there and then and I'm now awaiting the forms.

 

I didn't realise the Site Team members acted on other parts of the CAG Site or I would have come straight to CitizenB and DX100uk on the PPI forum. Sorry, no offence meant

 

ciao

 

Tenmen

[citizenB]

I didn't realise the Site Team members acted on other parts of the CAG Site or I would have come straight to CitizenB and DX100uk on the PPI forum. Sorry, no offence meant

 

 

we are all over the forums like a rash ! and no offence taken

[Tenmen10]

Good evening all,

 

an update regarding two of my PPI claims still ouitstanding.

 

The below link is for a thread started regarding a Debenhams account

but I actually have two claims through Santander which have both had a Final Refusal.

 

One is for a Burtons account opened in 1992

and the second is for a Debenhams account opened in 1997 both through GE Capital.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?349780-*Diabetes*-Santander-refuse-claim-on-non-advise-basis

 

Both claims are regarding the fact I had a pre-existing medical condition at the time of sale (Insulin Dependent Diabetes)

and on one (Burtons) I was actually a temporary agency worker.

 

Unfortunately,

due to the passage of time (1991-1994),

I have no proof of being temporarily employed and neither does the agency who employed me.

 

I have received copies of the Credit Agreements of both accounts

and although I have filled in my name and address and signed the Customer Consent section,

the Card Protection (PPI) sections were pre-ticked.

 

There is no evidence of the telephone discussion which took place for this sale in my SAR.

 

The FOS say that as both accounts were under GE Capital at the time

they have no juristiction but they may contact the PPI underwriters if I can provide details.

 

I've read similar threads regarding the FOS & PPI underwriters and it seems to involve a lot of huffing and puffing with no positive result to speak of.

 

Santander themselves have referred me to the FLA (the Finance and Leasing Association)

but their complaints procedure does not accept a complaint without new information.

 

http://www.fla.org.uk/consumers/complaints-process

- as I can't prove I was temporarily employed when opening my Burtons account I doubt the FLA will be any help.

 

ims21 seems to have been involved in a lot of the Santander threads from this time

and most seem to have headed toward a Small Claims Court but there don't seem to be any positive end results as yet.

 

Have I missed anything, any further suggestions before I go the court route?

 

regards

 

Tenmen10

[ims21]

Two threads merged.

 

I would try using FSA handbook here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?305682-FSA-Handbook

 

Appendix 2 is the part that is going to be useful to you.

 

GE are typically one of the most difficult nuts to crack.

 

You could always try fos and see if they will go down the underwriter route on your behalf...after all you don't really care who coughs up as long as you get your money back.

 

Court is also an option.

 

I think the reason we don't see many cases going to court is that it can be daunting for some folk and the onus of proof of mis-selling is on the claimant. In the samll claims court the onus of proof is on the balance of probability and not on the basis of beyond reasonable doubt.

[up2meears]

Good luck Tenman,

 

I am going through virtually the exact same thing with Santander regarding two GE storecads (BHS and Evans)

 

BHS (which the shop application shows I didn't sign for PPI) claim it was sold over the telephone and despite not being able to prove this have not upheld the complaint, also with pre existing medical condition exact same wording as in your letter.

 

As for Evans, despite at the time, being 5 months pregnant and unemployed (as indicated on the application form filled in by shop assistant and told where to sign) They want me to prove it by asking Inland Revenue for a copy of my NI contributions from 1999?

 

I'm getting fed up of playing letter ping pong and receiving the same pig poo drivel from them so have now put it in the hands of FoS. Okay it may take ages, but on the up side the guy at FoS said it has a very good chance of being upheld, and as I have to make two separate complaints Santander will have to pay two lots of case fees and all this for not even 300 quid of premiums!

 

Haha, as I'm typing this, the post man has just delivered another letter saying they are looking into my email sent to CEO and it's dated two days later than their final response in regards to same email?? I give up

 

Anyway, good luck again

 

Up2

[Tenmen10]

Good afternoon,

 

its all change again - I found the underwriters details in the Credit Agreement info from my SAR so rang the FOS so they could act on my behalf. . . . .

 

The woman I spoke with this morning then said it was up to ME to contact the Underwriter and give them the 8 week to deal with the claim. The Gent I spoke with last night said the FOS would deal with it(!)

Once I cleared up the fact I have already contacted Santander and they have refused without mentioning the Underwriter the FOS lady, after a discussion with a colleague, decided to take my claim on which I am surprised at. She is sending the appropriate forms and asking me to photocopy any supporting evidence. She also took into account my claim that I was temporarily employed despite me having no proof.

 

I need to ring back this afternoon as I still have two more PPI related accounts with Santander one of which I had forgotten. Being at work I didn't have time to go through all the details on the phone.

 

Up2mears, I asked about the 'non-advise' defense which is prominent with GE Capital/Santander and the FOS rep said it is still up to the seller of the insurance to point out the possible exceptions regarding pre-existing medical conditions. This is not classed as advice. I have also been told by the FOS that there is a good chance they will also uphold my claim.

 

So now its a matter of filling in a couple of questionnaires and photocopying more documents and back to the FOS.

 

Good luck up2mears, hope we both get a positive result & thanks again to ims21 and the fellow CAG helpers

 

regards

 

Tenmen10

 

I'm leaving Santander well alone