Thursday 17 January 2013

PPI Complaints now Topping 1,000 a Day

It has been described as the largest financial scandal in British history. It is calculated that there is now more than 1,000 complaints regarding Mis-Sold Payment Protection Insurance being made every day. With banks and lenders falsely rejecting a significant number of complaints, Claims Management Companies and the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) have had to pick up the slack to try and bring monetary justice to those who were Mis-Sold PPI.

Banks and lenders are unfairly rejecting tens of thousand of Payment Protection Insurance complaints. Many of these rejected parties are refusing to take no for an answer and seek the compensation that they deserve elsewhere.

Out of the UK banks and lenders, Lloyds Banking Group has been the hardest hit. The banking giant has had to set aside more than £5bn to cover the Payment Protection Insurance repayments that they expect to make. The bank receives 65,200 complaints regarding PPI every month. Of these 1,600 are rejected and subsequently referred to the FOS. Out of this 1,600, a staggering 98% are upheld by the FOS. This suggests that 98% of PPI Refund complaints refused by Lloyds are unfairly done so. Similarly Barclays were found guilty in 93% of cases, Royal Bank of Scotland 87%, HSBC 66% and Nationwide 18%.

In early 2011, the banks which were guilty of mis-selling Payment Protection Insurance lost a decisive court case which determined that they would have to pay the refunds to the affected customers. Although this decision tied their hands, banks have complained of customers seeking compensation that they are not entitled to. Banks and lenders have described some customers seeking PPI Compensation as ‘ambulance chasing’ opportunists. Banks and lenders offered Payment Protection Insurance as a product to protect their payments. It was intended to help customers make repayments on credit cards and loans even in times of financial or medical hardships. However, many of these policies were sold to customers who did not request or require them. In some cases, the product was sold to those who were not even applicable and had no use for the product.

No comments:

Post a Comment