DFD PPI Reclaim

[herbekj]

Isn't it strange that the IP companies represented on this forum that get the most complaints are also the ones now issuing this new PPI stupidity.

The other IP companies that get none or far fewer complaints overall on the forum seem to have no-one complaining about this issue.

Choose your IP wisely.

[luluj]

Sorry for the ongoing thread - I am beginning to think I have opened up a can of worms that will go on and on by not agreeing with James - sorry ! But I still stand with my comment - you should only claim it if you no you were mis-sold it !

[Foggy]

.... and I still agree with you [:D]

I think the IP, who is supposed to be balancing the interests of both debtor and creditor should be a little less "creditor led" and excercise more thought and discretion.

A few noteable firms already do so, and they get great results all round. As they say, you catch more bees with honey, rather than with vinegar"

[kazzafunk]

I still can't get my head around agreeing with it either. I just have to be grateful that the only PPI I have ever had is in dispute with the FO at present and will be sorted in the next 6 weeks so no delays in 4 1/2 years!

Good luck everyone who are with these companies and I hope you can sort out the PPI issue asap.

[msjax]

Thats a fantastic description of how proof of mis selling of PPI is constituted Declan, but it does not answer the question as to why DFD are writing to their customers telling them that they must sign over the authority to Equity Finances to re claim PPI, for a nominal charge of only 36% plus VAT (which I appreciate that the customer does not pay), and suggest when asked that failure to sign "could" cause the IVA to fail. Can I also point out that mis sold PPI can be claimed back individually by the owner of the policy for no charge. If this was to happen and all proceeds handed over to the IVA, then I could support what you are saying about maximising return, but when you use a company that will receive apx £1600 in charges for every £5k won, how is this "maximising" return for the IVA. Can I also ask how it can be morally justifiable that action like this is taken against the companys that are already receiving less money than they expected in the first place ?? Finally can I ask why DFD feel they have the right to suggest that a secured loan that I have (it is not my IVA), should also be submitted to Equity Finance to persue claim on because that one really is confusing me. Anyway, rant over, I do however suggest that this is extremely distasteful because people who take the very large step of doing an IVA have enough stress going on for them without having this thrown at them, sometimes very late in the IVA. If my husband was unfortunate enough to find himself in this position again, I must say that from our own experience of DFD, and others that I have read on here, the next time around I would have chosen Melanie Giles for him. A real human person, with a sensible screwed down head, who actually cares about the people who find themselves taking this step. Can I also say that you seem very nice Declan but Im having a DFD rant and cannot wait for it all to be over so life can return to normal.

[Foggy]

Quote from your earlier post, Declan:

"The evidence of thousands of claims supports the assumption that these processes were not routinely followed. The putting aside of billions of pounds by the big banks as provision for PPI claims further supports."

I would hazard a guess that a high percentage of those thousands of claims have been "engineered" to fit the mis-selling criteria. Probably even more so since many claims are going undefended now. All the claimant needs is a "legitimate" excuse to lodge a claim, so they simply choose one of those reasons oft cited as causes of mis-selling.

For instance, "I thought the loan would be denied if I didn't take up the PPI" ... excellent choice of reason. Practiacally undefendable by the seller, if he chose to defend the claim.

The banks (and I am no friend of these institutions) have put aside the billions because they know they are on a hiding to nothing and it is less costly not to defend the cases and write off a smaller loss.

The premise that thousands are getting away with fraudulent claims does not give me , in all good conscience, the right to follow the herd.

I agree, however, if there is a "hand on heart" genuine claim, go for it.

Anyway --- all that aside, Declan, Have a good holiday and try to relax (don't have work problems running through your head all the time). That's an order, or Mel will be after you [:D][:D]

[12 months to go]

I’m jumping on the band wagon or should I say DFD wagon now; I would like however to say that I have always been very happy with DFD and felt that they bent over backwards to help me a few years ago when my circumstances changed massively.

That however changed this week, with the DFD letter & more so with the condescending young lady who dealt with my call on the phone; poor girl, she was clearly reading from a script in a high pitched voice with little interest or regard for anything I had to say; perhaps she didn’t have a brain of her own and hence could only keep repeating the same line from the script. Again, whilst other people have posted about staff at DFD with complete lack of sympathy or understanding this is the first time I have ever encountered this from DFD. I rang back a few minutes later as I was so incensed, but then discovered possibly a little known underhand tact that it would appear DFD employ. The initial young lady with script in hand I had spoken to, had not asked me for any personal info, name, postcode etc etc, so when I called back and spoke to a very friendly and helpful lady, explaining my unhappiness, she said she would check the call notes; I explained that there wouldn’t be any, but after a few seconds she came back to me to say she had found the notes of my call from a few minutes earlier and was reading them. I asked her to check that it was indeed for myself as I knew I hadn’t been asked for any personal information and she explained that the phone number I had called from was recognised by the DFD “ system “ as being me and so they had recorded details of my call against my details. Now I have no problem whatsoever with anything said in the conversation but do find this practice extremely sneaky if not somewhat underhand.

Anyway moving on and getting back to the original point, whilst I may have accumulated a foolish amount of debt, I am not stupid and call me boring, but in all my financial dealings over the years, I always read the small print cover to cover and always requested PPI even if it want offered, as I truly believed in PPI & still do. Furthermore I particularly used to check what was covered and not covered and this is where my genuine issue is and why I destroyed the pack from Equity Finance.

PPI was not mis sold to me and I think I am the best judge of that. I do not want to jump on the bandwagon of fraudulent claims , as I fully believed and understood PPI and was never mis sold it, in some cases I requested it and fully checked that I was covered for likely situations. I also questioned why the form from Equity finance wanted employer details as I in no way see this as relevant.

I therefore am unable to agree with instructing Equity Finance and was also somewhat disappointed that the DFD call centre staff kept trying to refer me back to equity finance. As far as I am concerned my IVA was arranged through DFD and in my opinion, they have no right to pass my details to a 3rd party company without my permission.

I agree with an earlier post regarding the stress in the early days of arranging an IVA and feel that in my final months I am being somewhat intimidated by DFD and I am left worrying that my refusal to allow Equity Finance to fill their pockets in mis representing me, could cause problems in my final months of my IVA and this clearly should not be the case, having got so far through the IVA process, with DFD who hitherto have been superb.

[msjax]

You raise a very good point there "12 months to go", which I had not considered. I do not recall in any way whatsoever, my husband giving his permission for other companys to contact him for what should be deemed as "marketing calls" and literature. I believe this would be classed as marketing because somebody will make money out of it. I certainly did not give them permission to pass over my personal details (I am not in the IVA) for marketing. I believe that data protection has been breached here, and the fact that your telephone number comes up is not sufficient to prove that the caller is you. I know this myself because I work in the data protection sector myself. All very valid points which I shall be running past my solicitor next week. I will post the outcome but having already had a brief chat with my solicitor, and my emoployers, I am pretty sure that I know what the answer will be. All who are being intimidated by this under hand tactic, keep your chin up and dont let it get ya down.

[Gareth]

I believe a lot of companies now use intelligent phone systems that can identify your telephone number so that when you call in it diverts the call to the right person to deal with your query. Varden Nuttall doesnt employ such a system but I can see their benefits in some situations.

I would be concerned that the person on the phone had not asked any security questions as just because its your telephone number it doesnt mean that you are the person speaking. As MSJax says this is a potential data protection issue if they disclosed any of your IVA details during the call.

From what Declan at DFD is saying, they are recommending that clients investigate any possible PPI claims with an associated company. This implies that you have a choice and if you feel strongly about it then you need not claim.

For most people who are not nearing the completion of their IVA PPI should not cause any issues and if anything may improve the return to creditors. This means that should the client encounter difficulties in the future and a reduction in payments be required, the creditors will be more inclined to accept as they are getting a better return than they otherwise would.

I think the biggest concern people have had with the PPI issue is the way that companies have gone about investigating any mis-selling. I include my company, Varden Nuttall in this. With hindsight better communication and reassurance could have been provided to clients. We have taken on board all comments we have received and will learn from this going forward. The best thing that clients can do if they are concerned is give feedback to their IP and if they are still unsure then seek independent advice.

[plasticdaft]

If you are in an iva and have a claim for mis sold ppi the choose you own company to reclaim it as I don't doubt the ones recommended by your ip are passing something the way of the iva firm!

Paul

[kazzafunk]

Do it yourself and even more money will go to the IVA pot.