13 March 2017
It can be tough knowing who can claim PPI compensation and why, simply because there were so many reasons why PPI was mis-sold. Also, the banks and lenders, for obvious reasons, are too keen on giving their profits away.
BERYL is recently widowed. Her husband's death was unexpected. She found herself plunged into worrying financial times, especially as only two years before they had taken out a joint loan for home improvements. When Beryl made a claim against the PPI policy, she was told she couldn't claim. Why?
JOHN was made redundant from his work at a local brewery. He made a claim against the PPI policy he bought on his credit card but was told he didn't have a valid claim. Why?
TREVOR is self-employed fencing contractor, working on farms and country estates throughout the country. He was hurt as part of a recent contract and spent several days in hospital. He also had to spend several weeks at home recuperating and when he does return to work, he will not be able to do as much as he once did, for a short time at least. He has PPI on his business loan. He tried to make a claim but was told he couldn't. Why?
PPI policies usually covered one person - thus the policy that BERYL and her husband bought will have applied to only one of them. Unfortunately, in this case, the bank said it was her husband that the policy covered.
We have found in such cases that this was the default position of the bank - whoever was trying to claim against the policy, they were told it was the other spouse that it covered. If BERYL didn't know this, she can claim compensation for mis-sold PPI.
There are also cases of people being told that they didn't have a valid claim against their PPI policy because there was a lapse of time that needed to pass before they could claim against it.
This happened in the case of JOHN who was made redundant. Although he may have been entitled to claim under the policies terms and conditions, he had to wait six months by which time he would possibly have another job.
In the meantime, JOHN was pushed into severe financial straits, even though he thought he was covered.
In the case of TREVOR, he too was entitled to PPI compensation because he was not told that for him to make a claim, he would have to close his business.
As he employed a two people, he felt that this was unfair and if he had known, he would not have bought it.