Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

[di30]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Hi

The FOS will more than likely suggest the underwriter avenue as well.

It may take some time, but they do have some liabilities, below I will post up some info i posted on another thread here.

And I understand that Billy on here were recently successful with going the underwriter avenue. Same as your's as well from what I can recall.

However, yes do contact the FOS first on the free tel number they have and they will confirm your best avenue from here.

[di30]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

As promised above post........

When a loan business was not regulated by the Financial Service Authority (FSA), depending on the year, General Insurance Standards Council (GISC) were another regulator.

The FSA taken over GISC from 14 January 2005. However, not every business were covered by GISC as it was not compulsory back then.

So if you made a complaint to a company regulated/registered by GISC, and if it was rejected by a final decision made, you should receive a letter from the business to confirm you have rights to complain to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), even companies that were GISC regulated, but GISC more-so covered banks than any outside lenders where there were very few.

If the complaint was rejected, and on the grounds that it was not FSA/GISC regulated, the final letter should confirm another business called Financial Leasing Association (FLA) again though not all were covered by these either.

The FLA is a direction you can try, and depending if your able to provide any further information that the business you originally complained to, the FLA will consider if the case will be looked into further or not.

If the FLA agree, they will send the complaint with the further information you provided to them to the Higher dept (Management) of the business you originally complained to, to get looked at again.

The FLA should let you know either way within a week, and suggest other avenues if they think appropriate if the complaint is not passed back to the business you complained to.

Failing the above, another avenue is the Underwriter/Insurer who were possibly regulated, as they generally have to be to be dealing with Insurance.

The Financial Ombudsman Service usually suggests this avenue if all else fails.

Underwriters/Insurers still have some responsibility of when the policy was sold to the customer.
When they have Intermediaries/Advisers selling insurance products on their behalf, the policies are referred back to the Underwriters.

The Underwriters have a duty to check and make sure that the policy was sold correctly, and to ensure it suits Customer's requirements.

It is understood that Underwriters/Insurers do have a liability when Insurance products are sold, even if they were/are not present at the selling of the product.

The duties of the Underwriter include, evaluating an individual before issuing an Insurance policy.
It is a very important duty that an Insurance Underwriter must perform, must analyse the client's risk before issuing the policy, for example, such as Current Health Problems.

Underwriters/Insurers should analyse Insurance Applications determine whether they should be accepted or rejected.

If you do end up going to the Underwriter, the chances are they will still try to state that as they were not the ones responsible for selling the product, they may try rejecting.
But as they were possibly regulated, you can complain to the FOS, who will be willing to take it on, and then investigate any liabilities the Underwriter/Insurer had, of when the policy was sold to you, but it may just take some time.

[Scrappy Coco]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Cheers di30

Much appreciated

Thanks
Scrappy Coco

[Scrappy Coco]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Morning all,

Can someone take a quick look at the following before I send this off to FOS.

Please feel free to make any suggestions, comments etc as per the norm.

Cheers as always

Scrappy Coco

I recently received a final decision from the Ombudsman with regard to the following case references:

************
************

Up until the final decision was made I thought it would be prudent to keep paying the monthly premiums as Northern Rock had already admitted that they mis-sold me this policy.

Upon receipt of the final decision I immediately cancelled this policy and requested a full refund of premiums paid SINCE my previous claim had expired.

Northern Rock states that they understand my reasoning behind keeping the policy active but has refused me a refund advising that I should have cancelled the policy when it came to light that Northern Rock mis-sold the policy.

As previously pointed out, I thought it prudent to keep the policy live should FOS rule in my favour as I didn’t want NRAM to have any get out clause. In hindsight this was a mistake.

Please see attached documentation for clarification

A1
A2
A3
A4

This leads me on to my next point.

I would also point out that I am currently self employed and when I originally took out this policy I was employed.

At no point did Northern Rock reassess my circumstances when I returned to work to see if this policy was still suitable.

Under the terms of this policy it would have been extremely difficult for me to make another successful claim “for a self-employed customer to be covered if they became unemployed, their “business” would have to “permanently cease trading”

This means that I would have needed to stop working as a Brain Surgeon permanently to qualify for unemployment cover – which is very different from temporary unemployment.

So in relation to self-employment this amounts to a significant and onerous restriction with regards to cover.

I have waded through the small print of the policy documents myself to check that it is still suitable. In light of restrictions and implications I have found, it is unlikely I would have proceeded with this policy had this information been brought to my attention when my employment situation changed.

[di30]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Morning all,

Can someone take a quick look at the following before I send this off to FOS.

Please feel free to make any suggestions, comments etc as per the norm.

Cheers as always

Scrappy Coco

I recently received a final decision from the Ombudsman with regard to the following case references:

************
************

Up until the final decision was made I thought it would be prudent to keep paying the monthly premiums as Northern Rock had already admitted that they mis-sold me this policy.

Upon receipt of the final decision I immediately cancelled this policy and requested a full refund of premiums paid SINCE my previous claim had expired.

Northern Rock states that they understand my reasoning behind keeping the policy active but has refused me a refund advising that I should have cancelled the policy when it came to light that Northern Rock mis-sold the policy.

As previously pointed out, I thought it prudent to keep the policy live should FOS rule in my favour as I didn’t want NRAM to have any get out clause. In hindsight this was a mistake.

Please see attached documentation for clarification

A1
A2
A3
A4

This leads me on to my next point.

I would also point out that I am currently self employed and when I originally took out this policy I was employed.

At no point did Northern Rock reassess my circumstances when I returned to work to see if this policy was still suitable.

Under the terms of this policy it would have been extremely difficult for me to make another successful claim “for a self-employed customer to be covered if they became unemployed, their “business” would have to “permanently cease trading”

This means that I would have needed to stop working as a Brain Surgeon permanently to qualify for unemployment cover – which is very different from temporary unemployment.

So in relation to self-employment this amounts to a significant and onerous restriction with regards to cover.

I have waded through the small print of the policy documents myself to check that it is still suitable. In light of restrictions and implications I have found, it is unlikely I would have proceeded with this policy had this information been brought to my attention when my employment situation changed.

Excellent!!!!

[Scrappy Coco]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Cheers DI,

That's exactly what I thought as well

Thanks as always

Scrappy Coco

[di30]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Cheers DI,

That's exactly what I thought as well

Thanks as always

Scrappy Coco

You covered it all, so there was nothing more I could say, well done anyway, its a fab letter x

[Scrappy Coco]

Re: Cardif Pinnacle / NRAM reclaim hassle

Evening all,

All information present and correct and ready to be posted recorded first thing in the morning.

Don't think I have left anything out.

Keeping that online ruling to myself until I hear what adjudicator comes back with. If it's not in my favour I'll hit them with it and ask them to explain whats on their website that differs in any way to what my complaint is about.

Fingers crossed

Thanks as always

Scrappy Coco