Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Niddy, this is the response I received in regards the info we asked them to take into account and was also informed that Lloyds will be getting by to them by Monday, the deadline was originally today.

Email received just now here;

Dear Mr and Mrs

Thank you for your email.

I have spoken to the case handler at Lloyds, who has confirmed that the response to the queries made, will be provided on Monday. Upon receipt of this, I will email to let you know.

I have noted your comments regarding the eligibility factors. The ombudsman will look at the whole complaint afresh and independent from the adjudicators assessment. In reaching a final decision, it is matter of discretion for the ombudsman as to which factors to put most reliance on. As the ombudsman has requested that Lloyds respond to the comments about eligibility, I would conclude that this is something that is factoring in her consideration.

Yours sincerely


Adjudicator| Financial Ombudsman Service
South Quay Plaza | 183 Marsh Wall | London | E14 9SR

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Thank you :-) x LOl

His email said yesterday he would give us an update today to confirm if Lloyds need more time or if they have passed the info etc, and Niddy I have also emailed them with your info cheers for that.

[cookie2112]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I mean Cookie2112 lol, think I said 2012 on the ppi thread too lol sorry x

No worries, you're forgiven! Fingers crossed for tomorrow

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Dear Mr and Mrs

Thank you for your email.

I have noted the comments you have made and attached the email to our electronic file that we hold for your complaint. I confirm that the ombudsman has access to this as well as all other previous information and documentation that yourselves and Lloyds have sent by email and post.

Yours sincerely


Adjudicator| Financial Ombudsman Service
South Quay Plaza | 183 Marsh Wall | London | E14 9SR
': 020

Write back and say

"thanks for your email however I want clarity by confirmation that the ombudsman WILL look into the eligibility factors surrounding the products versus our medical conditions at that time. The adjudicator missed this totally and I want to ensure the ombudsman doesn't and it makes sense to look at that at the same time they look into the eligibility verses earnings argument.

I would therefore request you speak to the ombudsman and clarify the above points"

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Dear Mr and Mrs

I will email you tomorrow Friday 28th February 2014 to confirm whether Lloyds has responded and whether further time has been granted.

Yours sincerely


Adjudicator| Financial Ombudsman Service
South Quay Plaza | 183 Marsh Wall | London | E14 9SR
': 020

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I mean Cookie2112 lol, think I said 2012 on the ppi thread too lol sorry x

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Thank you Cookie2012 x

[cookie2112]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Good luck di30, fingers crossed for you

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Dear Mr and Mrs

Thank you for your email.

I have noted the comments you have made and attached the email to our electronic file that we hold for your complaint. I confirm that the ombudsman has access to this as well as all other previous information and documentation that yourselves and Lloyds have sent by email and post.

Yours sincerely


Adjudicator| Financial Ombudsman Service
South Quay Plaza | 183 Marsh Wall | London | E14 9SR
': 020

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Ok send this back

"thanks for your email clarifying what it is you're doing. Whilst we're on the subject of our clear illegibility for the product complained about; you also need to note that we both had medical preconditions that would also have excluded our eligibility for the Platinum Premier account. Let's not forget that they previously upgraded us to the gold account and the fee didn't change.

Please confirm you're also looking at our medical exclusions as well as the financial exclusions that should have barred us from taking the product; which was auto upgraded. We never asked for any upgrade"

Thank you Niddy, will do this right now!

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

When these were originally launched, the criteria was either an annual income or sometimes a high net vaue (of marketable assets)

e.g. for the Premier account, (launched 2003) it was >£60k gross annual income (£80k for a joint account) or >£100k of marketable assets.
Monthly charge was £15

The platinum account (launched in 2001) required you to be over 21 and earn at least £35k
Monthly cost was £12 (but this was waived if you kept a minimum of £3.5k in the account)

The gold account cost £8 per month and required an annual income of just £6k.

I think these requirements were removed near the start of 2008, and monthly fees increased.

The classic account had no minimum requirements (other than the usual satisfactory credit history) and had no monthly fees, as it is today

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Ok send this back

"thanks for your email clarifying what it is you're doing. Whilst we're on the subject of our clear illegibility for the product complained about; you also need to note that we both had medical preconditions that would also have excluded our eligibility for the Platinum Premier account. Let's not forget that they previously upgraded us to the gold account and the fee didn't change.

Please confirm you're also looking at our medical exclusions as well as the financial exclusions that should have barred us from taking the product; which was auto upgraded. We never asked for any upgrade"

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Was meant to post above of the income amounts, for what it was back in those days....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...-platinum.html

I think they stopped this in about 2008.

[di30]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

Your right Niddy, when it came to platinum, premier, they were income related of between approx £35 to £60K at the time on researching. when we have never been anywhere near that on a full income in total.
When they upgraded us to Gold, 2000-2001 the income was eligible but we were paying the same monthly amount on the previous account each month of £8, we thought the previous account was normal charges so when they upgraded to gold the same amount was coming out then too, then on them upgrading the monthly amounts for the account raised.

We do both have health issues and have done since the 90's, this was raised to the previous adjudicator but no questions been raised by the ombudsman on this yet.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Not too good news with my packaged reclaim/FOS

I'm guessing by this you're arguing one of the reclaim points of ineligibility was the fact you weren't earning enough to warrant that type of account in the 1st place?

Is this true and was there income thresholds on the accounts in question? Was your eligibity re health brought up by the ombudsman cos I'm sure due to past conditions you're both ineligible anyway aren't you?