What are the problems with PPI?

Payment Protection Insurance (or PPI as it is known) has considerable problems – not so much as a product, but in the way that it was sold.  The Financial Services Authority, which has now been replaced by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) highlighted this following a super complaint in 2006 by the Citizens Advice Bureau.  They believed that Payment Protection Insurance was wildly mis-sold and was a completely inappropriate product, in that the vast majority of people, even when they had the policy, could not obtain any form of protection from it when it came to a claim.

Subsequently the FCA investigated this.  Following their investigation and legal action against the Banks in 2011, they agreed to address the situation concerning Payment Protection Insurance.  The FCA held back from suggesting that the sale of Payment Protection Insurance amounted to fraud, but in effect it did, in that the Banks were obtaining a monetary benefit from clients in a way that was deceitful and dishonest as the product was wholly inappropriate and was only sold to generate vast profits for the Banks.

The product itself was alleged to cover unemployment and disability, as well as injury and sickness. Therefore, cover would be provided to meet monthly payments should any of these particular areas crop up and you lose, or have a reduced income for a period of time.  Unfortunately, the vast majority of Payment Protection Insurance was inappropriate as most people were not covered, and under 10% of any claims that were made in order to achieve some sort of cover protection when something happened and the income was reduced, were accepted for payment.  People were being sold the unemployment benefit, even though they were self-employed, and could never have claimed upon it.  Others were being sold the Payment Protection Insurance regardless of whether they had any pre-existing conditions, which would have affected the claim straightaway.

The whole sales process surrounding Payment Protection Insurance was, that if you had any form of borrowing (and it did not matter which borrowing this was in relation to) whether it was a credit card, loan, mortgage, hire purchase (HP) or store card – Payment Protection Insurance was added, almost as a stipulation, rather than an element of protection for the client should anything untoward happen.

To the end of October 2015, the Banks have refunded approximately £25billion in relation to claims for the mis-sale of this particular product.  If you have not made a claim to date, then it is essential that you do so.  It does not make any difference whether you have the details to confirm if Payment Protection Insurance has been applied or not, or whether you have any recollection at all as to whether Payment Protection Insurance was applied.  You do not need to know account details and you do not need paperwork.  All you need to know for us to be able to make contact with the Lenders are the names of the Lenders that you have or have had facilities with, either historically, or current.

Our oldest successful claim was from 1987.  Therefore, time is not an issue necessarily, depending on the records that the Banks may maintain.  We are always happy to look at any Lender that the client would like us to.  As long as we know who it is, regardless of the time and other information that you may or may not have.

All of our work is on a “No Win No Fee” basis so if for some reason there is no PPI, or no information can be located there is no fee to pay.

Speak Your Mind