It is recommended that should you have had a PPI claim that you submitted prior to 2014 and it was was rejected that you may wish to consider re-intimating the same. The reason for the same is that Banks and credit card providers have been told to re-open approximately 2.5 Million PPI complaints.
CBC Solicitors Blog, Rutherglen & Glasgow
The significance of Plevin –v- Paragon relates to the concept of “unfair relationship”. To be technical this refers to Section 140 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Court decision in 2014 was the first time that this Section of the Consumer Credit Act had been challenged to such a high judicial level.
We hear little of the Chief Executive of the Lloyds Group these days on PPI matters. He appears to be doing a very good job in all other areas. When he originally took his post he was exceedingly critical of Claims Management Companies. Indeed, he suggested elements of dishonesty. It has always baffled me how anyone intimating themselves, or using a Claims Management Company or Solicitor Company to intimate a PPI claim could be described as being potentially fraudulent. If a Policy did not have the product it would be refused. If the product had PPI and the Bank were of the opinion it was fairly sold how could anyone suggest the intimation was fraudulent.