Banks to return €25 m to customers

Discussion in 'Payment Protection Insurance claims' started by Brendan Burgess, Oct 3, 2013.

  1. Brendan Burgess

    Brendan Burgess Founder

    Banks to return €25m to customers mis-sold policies

    number of policies should be examined|350,000
    So far "over half"|200,000
    1 in 5 mis-sold|40,000
    Total compensation|€25,000,000
    Average compensation| €625
  2. Raging Bull

    Raging Bull Frequent Poster

    Last edited: Oct 4, 2013
    Very interesting article in Irish Independent today by Charlie Weston

    Frank Conway of the Irish Financial Review accused the Central Bank of suppressing the problem in a bid to protect the banks.
    Mr Conway said: "The Central Bank has deliberately limited the numbers getting compensation to reduce the costs to the banks."
    And chief executive of the Consumers' Association Dermott Jewell said there was no reason to believe the mis-selling of what he called "useless" payment protection insurance (PPI) was any less a problem here than in the UK.
    Mr Jewell said: "There should be more people compensated. The scale of the mis-selling of the product here is likely to be the same as in the UK."

    Mr Jewell is the Chair of the FSO Council and if this is his opinion why does he not use his position as chair to do something.

    The whole think looks like a fudge
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2013
  3. Gerry Canning

    Gerry Canning Frequent Poster


    In UK 80% of claims are upheld, we get 20%?

    Our Ombudsman upholds a paltry 13%.

    I really do not know who we can turn to .
    Opinion; It is bad to know the Banks have stolen YOUR money but it is TERRIBLE to lose faith in our Ombudsman and our CENTRAL BANK.

    Has anyone any suggestions on how we could tackle Ombudsman and Central Bank and not be rolled over by their stall tactics?
  4. sahd

    sahd Frequent Poster

    Don't forget - that's 20% of all PPI policies sold here since 2007 .

    The UK 80% is where the buyer has complained - so they are more likely to be mis-sold policies.

    You are right about the Ombudsman here though - if he is only upholding 13% of complaints - then either the banks have been sorting out claims before teh ombudsman gets involved or he is easier on the banks than the UK ombudsman. If the banks themselves are admitting to 20% of all PPI being missold then the ombudsman figures look bad.
  5. Bronte

    Bronte Frequent Poster

    No suggestion on this, as I've no idea how one fights the cosy relationship of the banking establishment. But I agree with you.
  6. Gerry Canning

    Gerry Canning Frequent Poster

    Your Quote{UK 80% where customer complained, so they are more likely to be mis-sold}

    A few points on this .

    1. Before customer even GO to Ombudsman in Uk , MOST Banks payout .
    (in Ireland MOST banks do not payout and let case GO to Ombudsmamy)

    2. In Uk Ombudsman STILL pays out on 80% of cases EVEN though Banks have already accepted most other cases.
    (In Ireland Ombudsman still ONLY finds for 12%)

    Another issue;
    This Review was initaiated ONE year AFTER BANKS were warnd by Central Bank.
    Please Central Bank , HOW MANY OTHER ORGANISATIONS would you pre-warn?
    HOW MANY ORGANISATIONS would you permit to operate on a 20% scam ?

    There is NO doubt our Regulators are abusing their positions to ptotect their partners.

    Suggestions on this please.
  7. BertieBowel

    BertieBowel Frequent Poster

    I suspect that the fact many cases in the UK are paid by the Financial Institutions before they ever get to the Ombudsman is more to do with the Ombudsman funding model than anything else.

    I will stand corrected but from what I can see the Irish Ombudsman is funded through a levy of financial institutions, while the UK equivilant is funded thru a levy AND a fee per case taken (irrespective of whether it is upheld or not) - the fee charged to Financial Institutions is £500 plus a supplementary £350 for PPI cases.

    Thats a cost of £850 for the financial institution before a case is adjudacated upon - if an initial claim was in the region of £850 it makes economic sense to settle irrespective of whether there was misselling or not. This might explain why most banks pay out in the UK.
  8. Gerry Canning

    Gerry Canning Frequent Poster

    Not so , the reason the Fee was increased was because the Ombudsman had the power to charge when he figgured out Banks were messing.

    Also even when cases go to him and it has ALREADY cost Bank £850 he still finds for 80% of cases. Our Bucko finds for 12%
    Please ask yourself how this discrepancy occurs.
    On a ppi (flawed) Review from Central Bank they are finding 20% miss-sells

    Does not add up . Consumer is being let down by Ombudsman and Central Bank .
  9. BertieBowel

    BertieBowel Frequent Poster

    Gerry - my post was really to try and shed some light on your comment;

    1. Before customer even GO to Ombudsman in Uk , MOST Banks payout .
    (in Ireland MOST banks do not payout and let case GO to Ombudsmamy)

    If Financial Institutions in the UK are going to incurr a cost of £850 for every case that goes to the Ombudsman, irrespective of whether it is ruled in their favour or not, the system is set-up for the institutions to settle and not allow cases to go to the Ombudsman. This may explain the high pre-Ombudsman settlement rate.

    I cant comment on why there are differences in the Ombudsman rulings in both juristictions.
  10. Gerry Canning

    Gerry Canning Frequent Poster

    I hear you.
    In Uk average claim is £2500 so it would make sense for Bank to NOT pay out but to defend .
    I suggest why they do pay out is, they know they are caught and no point in adding an extra 850 to their costs.

    In relation to Ombudsman rulings in UK V Roi , one apparent difference is that Roi Ombudsman accepts when Roi Bank states the Banks policy is to not to insist on taking ppi to get a loan ,he accepts Banks word over umpteen cutomers saying otherwise. There is no Written proof that Bank (pressed) customer so tough on customer!
  11. Gerry Canning

    Gerry Canning Frequent Poster

    Banks in ROI have now returned circa 64 million to customers.

    In Uk banks have returned 25 Billion.

    So in Ire the figure should be circa 2 Billion.

    Maybe the UK Ombudsman is wrong ?

    Or could it be our Financial Services Ombudsman (FSO) is wrong?
    Or could it just be our (regulators) are anti-customer?

    I find it strange that we havn,t managed to get traction on this 2 Billion Ponzi scheme.

    Any suggestions please.