Share this article: Bookmark and Share

Consumer Law Blog

What does the banks' legal defeat mean?

by Bradley Askew 28 July 2011

You may have noticed in the news recently that the high street banks have lost a long running legal battle with the Financial Services Authority (FSA), regarding the way in which Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) is sold to consumers.

The problem with this situation is that there is very little understanding about the fine details of the case for the millions of people who were mis-sold PPI Policies, and who may be entitled to compensation. Most of these people probably know very little about the background of this case and its implications.

PPI is a highly controversial financial product which was originally designed in order to help people carry on with their repayments for certain debts in the event that they lost their income as a result of an illness,  accident or being made redundant. PPI allows the consumer to pay a small monthly premium per thousand pounds of debt insured, and once an initial qualifying period had passed, the insurance company would meet the repayments on that debt if the consumer was unable to work due to unforeseen circumstances.

The trouble was that PPI companies often inappropriately sold these policies by forcing customers to take them out with a loan or other types of credit products, or by misleading consumers into buying more expensive policies which were completely unsuitable but resulted in the salesman receiving a higher commission bonus.

Back in 2005 the FSA took over the regulation of PPI selling and produced detailed guidelines and rules about how PPI should and shouldn't be sold. Any company in breach of these rules would be found guilty of mis-selling and every consumers affected would be able to make a claim against the PPI company for a full refund.

However, many financial companies continued and increased the mis-selling of PPI and in 2010 the FSA imposed stricter rules which would apply to all past PPI sales. The FSA also proposed that banks should also review their past sales and contact any consumers who were potentially affected by PPI mis-selling to advise them how to make a claim.

The major high street banks were in dispute about the new rule and argued that by applying it to old sales was unfair. The banks decided to launch a judicial review in the High Court, in which they asked a judge to rule that the FSA had acted unfairly and unlawfully by introducing retroactive rules. During the course of the legal action, the banks stopped processing all complaints about mis-sold PPI complaints, stating that the outcome of these complaints could be affected by the result of the Judicial Review, although in actuality the FSA's new rules had no bearing on the vast majority of these claims.

In April 2011 the High Court rejected the banks' case, although they continued to place PPI complaints on hold until 9th May when they announced that they would not be appealing this decision. As a result of this climb-down, PPI companies must now resume the processing of complaints about mis-sold PPI and must begin to implement the FSA's new rules.

This result means that if you have made a claim for mis-sold PPI but it has been placed on hold by the PPI company, you should expect your case to commence as soon as possible. The major banks and insurance companies are reportedly taking on thousands of temporary staff to help deal with the massive backlog of unprocessed claims which has built up over the last several months, as well as the expected increase in new claims.

The outcome of the Judicial Review also means that if you purchased a PPI policy, you may shortly be receiving a letter from the PPI company explaining that you may be entitled to a refund if the policy was mis-sold to you. The letter should give you detailed instructions on how you can make a complaint.

However, if you do not receive a letter it does not necessarily mean that you do not have a claim. The PPI companies are not required to write to every single customer that has taken out a PPI policy, they only have to contact those customers they believe to have been at the greatest risk of being mis-sold PPI. Because of this loophole the banks and other financial institutions involved in the PPI mis-selling scandal will want to minimise the number of people they give refunds to and so they are likely to adopt restrictive criteria when deciding who to write to.

You do not need to wait for the company which sold your PPI policy to get in touch with you, it is perfectly fine to make a claim for mis-sold PPI, if you think that the PPI company which sold your policy acted unfairly or sold you a policy which was unsuitable for your needs.

Comments (0)

Post a comment