PPI joke offer&possible fraud

[Figgydoody]

Hi everyone!

 

 

I would appreciate any thoughts on the following situation-thanks!

 

 

My Uncle took out a credit card in the mid 70's. He wrote to the bank in 2008 requesting all of his PPI pmts back plus statutory interest.

 

 

In the reply he received, the bank blamed him for not raising the issue of the PPI with them sooner, stating that he could have cancelled at any time. Essentially, they claimed they had done nothing wrong but could not provide any p/work to support their assertions that he was provided with the PPI policy, T&C's etc... It is worth pointing out also, that a couple of years previous to that my Uncle had requested a copy of his credit agreement, which they could not provide, and as a result they discharged the debt!lol

 

 

Helpfully, they did advise him in their letter that PPI had been added in 1977, which, as they had no agreement makes you wonder how they knew that???

 

 

So, they bleated on about him not having a case, but as a gesture of goodwill they would refund, without any admission of liability, the PPI pmts made for the previous 6yrs, which amounted to just over £700. Comical! He wrote back and told them to shove it basically.

 

 

They did not respond to his letter, and he has been beset by ill-health so the matter has gone unresolved. He wants to sort it out now, but doesn't want to go to the Ombudsman.

 

 

His wife is a meticulous record keeper and has the cheque stubs going all the way back to when the account was opened proving that payments were made.

 

 

He feels that the bank has acted dishonestly and that their conduct in trying to deprive him of the monies he is genuinely owed could amount to fraud. Any thoughts?

 

 

They have admitted in writing that PPI was added in 1977, they have no p/work, their arguments were utterly spurious&he never requested nor was eligible for the insurance cover for a variety of reasons.

 

 

Their offer in no way reflects what he is owed, they didn't even offer 8% interest! He wants all the PPI going back to 1977, statutory interest and compound interest.

 

 

He also thinks that contacting the CEO would be the best way to proceed given that the PPI dept. attempted to screw him over. In view of recent headlines regarding banks not paying customers what they are owed, he believes that providing the CEO with a copy of the letter he received and the calculation of what he is actually owed will hopefully focus his mind, particularly if he threatens to send a copy of the file to the FCA.

 

 

I look forward to your comments and thanks in advance!

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Figgydoody.

[ims21]

Which lender is this?

 

I would guess that their offer of redress back in 2008 contained a "final decision" statement. If it did then you would technically be out of time to refer to fos anyway.

 

It could be worth putting in another claim and hope they don't notice that one was done some 6 years ago.

 

He should get all of his payments back beyond six years and all of the interest charges as a result and 8% where applicable...it isn't a straight 8% on credit card reclaims.

 

In addition he should also get back any charges for late payment or being over limit (if any) which were incurred as a direct result of the PPI. Contractual interest should also come back on those too.

[Figgydoody]

Hi Ims,

 

 

It's RBS. Actually, the letter was open ended and stated that if my Uncle had any other information they would be happy to consider it. There was no deadline stipulated for this.

 

 

Surely it could not harm his claim against them if he raises the issues with the CEO, after all, they were the ones who ignored his reply, and they were the ones trying to pull a fast one! They are bound to have a record of their offer in 2008 wouldn't you say?

 

 

Any thoughts on the fraud argument?

 

 

I've noted all your other points re what he should claim back. What rate of interest would be advisable re compound interest?

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Figgy.

[ims21]

Ok regarding your point about fraud....forget it. It will not get anywhere.

 

If there was no "final decision" statement then it would seem to me that this is still open for negotiation and yes, why not give the CEO a go.

 

To clarify what you would get back if successful...

 

1 -> All of the PPI premiums.

 

2 -> All of the contractual interest charged to the account as a result of those premiums.

 

3 -> Any charges applied to account which were triggered directly as a result of the mis-sold PPI

 

4 -> All of the contractual interest charged to the account on those charges.

 

5 -> The account should be reconstructed with the above removed. If for any month the reconstruction shows that the account would have been in credit had it not been for the PPI then you will get 8% simple interest on that credit balance for that month.

 

6 -> If the account has been paid off and closed, there will be a difference between the reconstructed balance and the amount actually paid off. 8% simple is awarded on that difference running from the date of payment up to the date of settlement of the claim.

[Figgydoody]

Hi Ims,

 

 

Okay, if fraud is a non-starter what would be appropriate to accuse RBS of because they certainly haven't been honest. It wouldn't be right to simply overlook their conduct, as they've sought to deprive my Uncle of thousands of pounds.

 

 

He has some of the statements for the account, so how would he find out what interest rates have been charged for lifetime of the account? As RBS are unlikely to want to supply stmts going back beyond 6yrs.

 

 

The account wasn't paid off, they discharged the debt as the result of having no agreement.

 

 

Can you advise me which spreadsheet would be most appropriate? Also, where my Uncle doesn't have statements but there is a record of the monthly payment made, is it possible to calculate what proportion of the payment is PPI?

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Figgy.

[ims21]

It is a standard mis-selling claim, not fraud.

 

The 8% interest where applicable is the compensation for the use of the claimants money to which they were not entitled.

 

The simple way of looking at the process is that the lender makes an offer of redress, the claimant decides whether to accept or not. If the latter then attempts are made to get the offer increased and if agreement cannot be reached then fos can look at the matter.

 

The only other recourse is through the courts and then the onus is on the claimant to prove mis-selling which can be difficult, especially when there are no documents available going that far back.

 

As far as spreadsheets are concerned, the normal one to use would be the fos running spreadsheet here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?330996-Latest-Spreadsheets-PPI-Claims-and-Charges-Claims-Dec-2011

 

but all of the statements are needed to complete it. The compound interest sheet won't give anywhere near an accurate figure in this case going back so far.

 

To get data going back to 1977 will, in my view, be extremely difficult if not impossible as it is highly likely that much of it has been destroyed. What you get from them in the way of data may depend on how hard you want to push for old data via a Subject Access Request.

 

It may well be that they simply do not have the data going back that far.

 

This may well end up as a case where each side has to take a view on what is a reasonable offer based on the data which is actually available and reach a settlement that way.

 

Having said that, when I sent my SAR to HFC, they sent me transaction histories going back to late 1989 and we know that some banks do hold data going back many, many years.

 

Also note that even if they haven't got a copy of the credit agreement, they may still be holding this debt on their books and for any successful reclaim they may use their right of set off to clear the debt first.

 

In answer to to the rates of interest, normally these appear on the monthly statements as they do tend to change over time on a credit card.

[Figgydoody]

Hi Ims,

 

 

You have misunderstood the point I am making. The primary issue is PPI mis-selling (or misrepresentation to give it its legal description) and I am not disagreeing with you on that matter. But just because a dispute starts out as one thing i.e. PPI mis-selling, does not mean that the bank isn't culpable in other areas of law regarding their conduct.

 

 

I have raised the issue of Fraud and you have dismissed it out of hand but did not explain why? Looking at the Fraud Act 2006, there would seem to be arguments one could put forward re Fraud by False Representation, Fraud by Failing to Disclose Information, (possibly) and certainly Fraud by Abuse of Position.

 

 

The provisions of the Fraud Act 2006 are very clear and certain provisions would appear to be applicable to my Uncle's case. I am not stating that as a definitive, merely proffering it as a possibility. How something appears and proving it are of course two entirely different things, but I think it would be rather short sighted not to look at how the bank has acted overall in a given situation. They should not be allowed to escape responsibility for their wrongdoings, by simply paying what is owed and then a line being drawn under the matter. That's why the FSA/FCA have fined financial organisations huge sums of money in addition to the banks having to put disputes right, to make the point that they cannot act with impunity and get away with it.

 

 

My Uncle's intention is to address the dispute with the bank, and then forward his p/work to the FCA and suggest they look at possible issues of Fraud and any other areas of wrongdoing that seem applicable. I have told him that the FCA don't investigate individual issues, but I know they collate details from the experiences people have had with banks etc..

 

 

My Uncle has sent off a DPA request, waiting for the information. He has some statements, a couple going back to 1996. As his wife has kept the cheque stubs for all the payments made to this card from the beginning, surely the PPI portion of the payment made each month can be calculated from that information?

 

 

Further, as there is cogent evidence of the payments made to the card, it isn't strictly necessary to have all the statements is it? There will be the question as to what the relevant interest rate was at various times, but perhaps with some research, chatting to others with RBS PPI issues, and taking a reasonable approach as to what interest rate to plump for if no evidence is available will be sufficient?

 

 

The bank have given a written undertaking to my Uncle that they have discharged the debt. They did this entirely of their own volition, I fail to see on what legal basis they could use their right to set-off, in view of what they've done.

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

Figgy.

[ims21]

By all means send a report the FCA and of course, if you wish, mention fraud to them.

 

As far as working out the PPI redress, you might get somewhere near the PPI premiums paid if the account was settled in full each month without fail and if you know what the rate of PPI was i.e. the number of pence in the pound that they charged.

 

In order to work out what the 8% entitlement would be you would need to know the actual balance at the en of each month and the reconstructed balance at the end of each month.

 

It may be possible to estimate what the interest rate was that was being charged on the account way back in the 90's and 00's.

 

It is not going to be an easy one to resolve though.