Posts Tagged ‘Claims’
Monday, May 3rd, 2010
Banks brought out Payment Protection Insurance to cover a consumer’s repayments in the event they lost the ability. However recently, it has been publicised that banks and lenders are exploiting the product through questionable loopholes. It has been sold to people who are uninformed, have not been quoted the cost or want it but don’t know they are ineligible. Most banks cunningly tag on PPI to any loan or credit and bank are pressured with bonus incentives to sell as much as possible.
The theory of PPI is great for borrowers, particularly given the rate of redundancies being made in the UK where people are losing their jobs left right and centre. It should mean that 3 months unemployed doesn’t mean going hungry because of mortgage repayments, but the reality is quite the opposite; lenders will avoid paying out at all costs, often claiming that an individual is not unemployed long enough or referencing some obscure small print.
The biggest con of all is the fact that you will most likely not be able to ever use the insurance in the event of an emergency, for example; if you are over 65, even if you are still employed, you could not claim PPI because you would be above the age of retirement. If you have a previously documented medical condition, no matter how small, you will be considered a high risk customer and as you are more likely to be off work on medical grounds, you would not be eligible for the insurance. If you are self employed, you are considered a higher financial risk customer someone employed full time, so you will not be entitled to PPI. But in any of these circumstances, banks will have no problem adding it on to a service with no intention of paying out if it is needed.
The PPI can take up a significant portion of your repayments, to put it in perspective, if your PPI was 30% of your monthly repayments and for 10 years you had been paying a 250,000/25 year mortgage, with interest this could add up to over 3000 to which you are entitled to reclaim.
The have been thousands of cases of banks mis-selling PPI just like this and if you are one of them, you are legally entitled to a full refund. You may need to be persistent with the banks and this can take time so it is sometimes easier to enlist a legal professional to do it for you. Doing this can save you all the legwork and give your claim much more authority, most agencies work on a no-win-no-fee basis so you will not be out of pocket. After a watchdog ruling in 2009 lenders are now required to correctly sell PPI to customers ensuring they are not overpriced, customers can chose to opt out at any time and they are fully covered.
There are many loan protection reclaim experts out there to help you claim back your PPI, contact Donns LLP for the best advice
Tags: bank, Claims, credit, Insurance, loan, mortgage, payment protection, PPI
Posted in Insurance | No Comments »
Tuesday, April 20th, 2010
If you have taken out a mortgage, loan or credit, it is likely that your lender sold you payment protection insurance. PPI is designed to help customers repay debt should they find themselves in difficult circumstances such as becoming unemployed or getting injured, however, the lenders found a loophole and have been selling PPI to customers who were not eligible for the cover or who did not fit the particulars of the PPI they were sold. If you have paid for PPI, whether you tried to use it or not, you may be entitled to claim this money back. What you may not be aware of is why you could be eligible to claim and why the banks could face a huge wave of payouts
The common misconception is that everyone is eligible for PPI but this is not the case. If you are older than 65, the age of retirement, you would never be entitled to claim PPI as you are likely not in full time employment. If you are self employed you are technically considered a financial risk and no PPI policy would offer to cover you ability to make repayments. If you have a historical medical condition you will be unlikely to be able to get PPI cover as you are more likely to be forced off work. Despite this, banks are more than happy to sell PPI to everyone knowing full well it will never cover them if needed.
Banks and lenders have allowed this situation to continue with full knowledge of the consiquences, this is something that has brought great negative attention from financial watchdogs. The government is forcing many of the UKs high street lenders to offer refunds to their customers although some have adopted a ‘don’t ask – don’t get’ policy meaning the consumer has to go on the hunt for their money either alone or with legal assistance.
The first step to claim back your PPI is to send your bank a letter requesting a full refund. The bank will reply with a long winded ‘no’ to which you will need to duplicate your first letter and in addition declare your intent to pursue legal action and support from the financial ombudsman. They will most likely respond with a variety of answers ultimately dismissing your claim, albeit wrongfully, due to your lack of authority. The key is persistence and it will significantly help your chances if you do get the ombudsman involved. Ultimately if all else fails, enlist professional help.
The easiest way to claim back your PPI is to use a legal agency as they know what they are doing and will be able to take care of everything for you. This will be much more effective than pursuing the matter yourself and will most likely end in success. Many solicitors are no win no fee so there is no disadvantage to using them.
There are many companies that offer or specialise in PPI claims and they are fully capable of taking control of everything you need for your loan protection claim
Tags: bank, Claims, Finance, Insurance, Lawsuit, lawyers, loan, mortgage, payment protection insurance, PPI, refund, repayment, soliciters, sue
Posted in Insurance | No Comments »
Tuesday, April 20th, 2010
Three MPs who refused to pay back their false claims are at the heart of the expenses scandal, now facing court; they plan to defend themselves using legal aid at the taxpayer’s expense after their initial appeal for parliamentary immunity was refused. This move was condemned by Prime Minister Gordon Brown who declared they will have to pay back the costs.
Critics have considered it as a move by Brown to be seen to take a harsh stance against expenses fraud in the lead up to the general election, but some legal critics have commented that there is no reason why anyone should not receive legal aid and have it paid for by the state.
60,000 was reportedly stolen by the MPs through false mortgage applications, rent claims and service invoices. But the cost of the prosecution will far exceed that figure, at the expense of the taxpayer the price of preparing their defence is likely to run into six figures even without the cost of the prosecution. There is further risk of the MPs having the case thrown out the Supreme Court which could send the cost even higher.
Jack Straw, Justice Secretary said the government was now introducing reforms to implicate means-tested legal aid although it would not be implemented in time for the MPs cases. For this case, Brown argued that the law has changed and although these changes will not take affect until June, it is just cause for the MPs to pay back the money.
Experts have estimated the total cost of the case to exceed 3 million; the investigation has so far cost Scotland Yard over 500,000. Trials will begin at Southwark Crown Court in London on May 27th where a spokesman has confirmed that the MPs were granted an application for legal aid, hiring high priced lawyers that cost hundreds of pounds an hour. If found guilty, the MPs could face up to seven years in prison for stealing taxpayers money.
If you are looking to claim back PPI you could be eligible for a large sum, most people don’t realise they are eligible for a loan protection claim
Tags: bank, Claims, credit, gordon brown, government, Insurance, loan, mortgage, payment protection, politics, PPI
Posted in Insurance | No Comments »
Wednesday, April 14th, 2010
The workplace is filled with stories where employers unfairly displace employees, based on either personal grudges or suspicions that have do not have any root causes for and neither have been substantiated in any way.
There are periods when removal from office is reasonable, based either on the lack of interest and responsibility shown by the worker, or when talking about current times, the economic crisis and recession has led to redundancies. If you fit in to the first category, then there are diverse means and methods of dealing with your issue; whether your removal from office was reasonable or not.
You may perhaps be unfortunate to get jammed with difficult employers. In such circumstances, you may possibly want to commence the ruling and see how it works out for you. Under the lawful act United Kingdom rule, employees have been provided with persuaded individual human rights, and they can put together the use of the rule in their act of gentleness. You could try appealing under the disciplining measures of your corporation, however if that does not work out then you may want to undertake the Employment Tribunal, also renowned as the Industrial Tribunal in Northern Ireland.
Sometimes, you may be unlucky to get stuck with unreasonable employers. In that scenario, you may want to try the law and see how it works for you. Under the United Kingdom law, employees have been provided with certain privileges, and they can make use of the law in their favour. You can try appealing under the disciplinary procedures of your employer, but if that does not seem to work out then you may want to try the Employment Tribunal, also known as the Industrial Tribunal in Northern Ireland.
If you are set upon making an official complaint at the Employment Tribunal, It is important to note that you have to do so within three months of your unreasonable removal from workplace. If you have come to an agreement with your employer such as the “cooperation accord”, it does not authorize you to lodge an authorized complaint against the employer.
It is important to note that if you are set upon making a formal complaint at the Employment Tribunal, you should do so within three months of your unfair dismissal. If you have come to an agreement with your employer such as the “compromise agreement”, it does not allow you to lodge a formal complaint against the employer.
You might have been given more than one explanation for your removal from office. Whatsoever be the explanation, it is up to you to demonstrate why you sense you have been unjustly dismissed. The court is there to only make a ruling in your favour if your case is convincing enough. Make sure that you have representative communication or any other evidence of records that state that you had been doing your employment in a standard manner and that you were unjustly dismissed.
In view of the information that your firm would previously have a dedicated litigator, it might be considerably complex to prove your case, principally if it has been a watertight exclusion from workplace, and there has not been any dappled business to have been engaged.
You may consult with professionals for Beneficiary Trust and get advice now.
Tags: Claims, Insurance, job insurance, negligence claims, personal loss claims, professional solicitors
Posted in Insurance | No Comments »
|
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Youtube
"OUR BLOG"