Explain this mis-selling thing to me
Discussion
fido said:
Adrian W said:
On the TV the other night they were showing the ten most wanted con artists in the UK, not one of them was a bank, if an individual does it, it is a crime, If a bank or insurance company do it, it is called something else
You put forward and emotive argument but saying they are just 'conmen' is not particularly relevant to the cases (see http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/ppi_thematic_repo... Most of the firms involved were not pressurising customers into buying these products - inappropriate sales, yes - TBH but i can't think of a company that hasn't sold me something i didn't really need. But as Tonker says, f8ckwits need to be protected from this sort of behaviour.the thing youa re describing, forcing someone to take one product or you won't sell them another, is actually more akin to blackmail or even demanding money with menaces in extreme cases. What the banks did was not pressure you into doing anything, just let you believe that what you were doing was for your own good when in fact it wasn't, by use of misinformation or by withholding information. This is a classic example of a con.
or if you are a large corporate, a mis-selling.
fido said:
Adrian W said:
On the TV the other night they were showing the ten most wanted con artists in the UK, not one of them was a bank, if an individual does it, it is a crime, If a bank or insurance company do it, it is called something else
You put forward and emotive argument but saying they are just 'conmen' is not particularly relevant to the cases (see http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/ppi_thematic_repo... Most of the firms involved were not pressurising customers into buying these products - inappropriate sales, yes - TBH but i can't think of a company that hasn't sold me something i didn't really need. But as Tonker says, f8ckwits need to be protected from this sort of behaviour.So, meeting the customers needs is not the main objective. It is stiffing the customer at every opportunity.
I am all in favour of the free market and competition. Capitalism works great when businesses operate in that environment. Where it goes wrong is when competitiveness is stifled either by insuficient players in the marketplace or the players that are there operate a form of cartel to artificially "not-compete".
Far too much of the latter has been going on for far too long - and ordinary people have been dreadfully exploited and ripped off by these large institutions.
And it's not just the "f...wits". a term I think is dreadfully insulting to those who found themselves in these situations.
At least the people recently conned are getting a s
tload of money back. When I bought my first house I had PPI added to my mortgage without even knowing what it was, just having it pointed out as a payment that would be collected, with no explanation. When I queried it some years later I was told it was 'just standard'. On top of that I was sold an endowment mortgage what would 'almost certainly' pay out a dividend at the end, and which 9 years later was set to deliver 35% below break-even. And what compensation did I get for being conned out of many thousands of pounds? fk all up a rope. Not that I'm bitter.
tload of money back. When I bought my first house I had PPI added to my mortgage without even knowing what it was, just having it pointed out as a payment that would be collected, with no explanation. When I queried it some years later I was told it was 'just standard'. On top of that I was sold an endowment mortgage what would 'almost certainly' pay out a dividend at the end, and which 9 years later was set to deliver 35% below break-even. And what compensation did I get for being conned out of many thousands of pounds? fk all up a rope. Not that I'm bitter.carmonk said:
........I had PPI added to my mortgage without even knowing what it was.........
............I was sold an endowment mortgage what would 'almost certainly' pay out a dividend at the end, and which 9 years later was set to deliver 35% below break-even.........
Sorry this won't wash. Did you actually READ the document you signed before you signed it? Clearly the answer is no.............I was sold an endowment mortgage what would 'almost certainly' pay out a dividend at the end, and which 9 years later was set to deliver 35% below break-even.........
Soovy said:
carmonk said:
........I had PPI added to my mortgage without even knowing what it was.........
............I was sold an endowment mortgage what would 'almost certainly' pay out a dividend at the end, and which 9 years later was set to deliver 35% below break-even.........
Sorry this won't wash. Did you actually READ the document you signed before you signed it? Clearly the answer is no.............I was sold an endowment mortgage what would 'almost certainly' pay out a dividend at the end, and which 9 years later was set to deliver 35% below break-even.........
I had an issue with which I'm considering looking into.
a few years ago I had a serious illness followed by clinical depression I enquired of a certain well know high street bank at the time of my situation and they said I couldn;t claim on PPI as I had to be out of work for three months before I could claim...
like I said I'm considering it
a few years ago I had a serious illness followed by clinical depression I enquired of a certain well know high street bank at the time of my situation and they said I couldn;t claim on PPI as I had to be out of work for three months before I could claim...
like I said I'm considering it
As a head of marketing in a large retail bank ( previous role) - I can confirm PPI WAS a total scam.
Deliberately heavily sold and marketed to ALL customers without explaining the chances of a successful claim were just about zero for just about ALL customers. Sold as " this will definitely pay xxx per month if u become unemployed."
Claims handling was outsourced to a 3rd party who made claimants claim process a complete misery ( I used to sit on some of the inbound calls when customers were so upset about the handling of their case)
PPI was heavily bonused to the sales teams so they really pushed it - highest margin product we had - high margin because it basically never paid out!
small print on page seventy twelve of the documents stated that the policy was invalid if the claimant thought there may be some reasons that he may in the future be unemployed when he took out the policy.... So if you thought there was a risk of unemployment ....policy not valid.
And the people who were sold this were fckuwits???? ps off
Deliberately heavily sold and marketed to ALL customers without explaining the chances of a successful claim were just about zero for just about ALL customers. Sold as " this will definitely pay xxx per month if u become unemployed."
Claims handling was outsourced to a 3rd party who made claimants claim process a complete misery ( I used to sit on some of the inbound calls when customers were so upset about the handling of their case)
PPI was heavily bonused to the sales teams so they really pushed it - highest margin product we had - high margin because it basically never paid out!
small print on page seventy twelve of the documents stated that the policy was invalid if the claimant thought there may be some reasons that he may in the future be unemployed when he took out the policy.... So if you thought there was a risk of unemployment ....policy not valid.
And the people who were sold this were fckuwits???? p
s off^^^^
interesting stuff...
sounds like "coverplan" Isold at dixons 20 years ago, high margin, low claims success...heavily pushed.
I genuinely did try to claim when I was laid up invalided about 6 years ago - needless to say I was unsuccessful and my credit rating subsequently suffered....
I think will make some enquiries...
interesting stuff...
sounds like "coverplan" Isold at dixons 20 years ago, high margin, low claims success...heavily pushed.
I genuinely did try to claim when I was laid up invalided about 6 years ago - needless to say I was unsuccessful and my credit rating subsequently suffered....
I think will make some enquiries...
Eric Mc said:
The atitude in big business seeems to be maximise profit AT ALL OPPORTUNITIES even if the product is inappropriate or right for the targetted customer.
Give me a break. So it's okay to stiff your customers in SOME circumstances?Is that what small business does? Clearly, Lloyds shareholders are the ones to have been stiffed in this circumstance and rightly so.
alfaman said:
As a head of marketing in a large retail bank ( previous role) - I can confirm PPI WAS a total scam.
Deliberately heavily sold and marketed to ALL customers without explaining the chances of a successful claim were just about zero for just about ALL customers. Sold as " this will definitely pay xxx per month if u become unemployed."
Claims handling was outsourced to a 3rd party who made claimants claim process a complete misery ( I used to sit on some of the inbound calls when customers were so upset about the handling of their case)
PPI was heavily bonused to the sales teams so they really pushed it - highest margin product we had - high margin because it basically never paid out!
small print on page seventy twelve of the documents stated that the policy was invalid if the claimant thought there may be some reasons that he may in the future be unemployed when he took out the policy.... So if you thought there was a risk of unemployment ....policy not valid.
And the people who were sold this were fckuwits???? ps off
Thank you for being so honest.Deliberately heavily sold and marketed to ALL customers without explaining the chances of a successful claim were just about zero for just about ALL customers. Sold as " this will definitely pay xxx per month if u become unemployed."
Claims handling was outsourced to a 3rd party who made claimants claim process a complete misery ( I used to sit on some of the inbound calls when customers were so upset about the handling of their case)
PPI was heavily bonused to the sales teams so they really pushed it - highest margin product we had - high margin because it basically never paid out!
small print on page seventy twelve of the documents stated that the policy was invalid if the claimant thought there may be some reasons that he may in the future be unemployed when he took out the policy.... So if you thought there was a risk of unemployment ....policy not valid.
And the people who were sold this were fckuwits???? p
s offI am actually quite despairing of the way people have been treated in this country.
Many, many people these days seem to live in a complete moral vacuum regarding their behaviour.
And, as far as all those people who seem to claim that those who got caught out more or less deserved it because they weren't bright enough - how dispicable.
Is that the normal business atitude now? This person looks a bit dim - lets fleece him for as much as we can?
Eric Mc said:
alfaman said:
As a head of marketing in a large retail bank ( previous role) - I can confirm PPI WAS a total scam.
Deliberately heavily sold and marketed to ALL customers without explaining the chances of a successful claim were just about zero for just about ALL customers. Sold as " this will definitely pay xxx per month if u become unemployed."
Claims handling was outsourced to a 3rd party who made claimants claim process a complete misery ( I used to sit on some of the inbound calls when customers were so upset about the handling of their case)
PPI was heavily bonused to the sales teams so they really pushed it - highest margin product we had - high margin because it basically never paid out!
small print on page seventy twelve of the documents stated that the policy was invalid if the claimant thought there may be some reasons that he may in the future be unemployed when he took out the policy.... So if you thought there was a risk of unemployment ....policy not valid.
And the people who were sold this were fckuwits???? ps off
Thank you for being so honest.Deliberately heavily sold and marketed to ALL customers without explaining the chances of a successful claim were just about zero for just about ALL customers. Sold as " this will definitely pay xxx per month if u become unemployed."
Claims handling was outsourced to a 3rd party who made claimants claim process a complete misery ( I used to sit on some of the inbound calls when customers were so upset about the handling of their case)
PPI was heavily bonused to the sales teams so they really pushed it - highest margin product we had - high margin because it basically never paid out!
small print on page seventy twelve of the documents stated that the policy was invalid if the claimant thought there may be some reasons that he may in the future be unemployed when he took out the policy.... So if you thought there was a risk of unemployment ....policy not valid.
And the people who were sold this were fckuwits???? p
s offI am actually quite despairing of the way people have been treated in this country.
Many, many people these days seem to live in a complete moral vacuum regarding their behaviour.
And, as far as all those people who seem to claim that those who got caught out more or less deserved it because they weren't bright enough - how dispicable.
Is that the normal business atitude now? This person looks a bit dim - lets fleece him for as much as we can?
I am equally appalled at the moral vacuum of clients, who while they're making money are quite prepared to claim that they are sophisticated investors, and as soon as their trade go tits they are poor Irish farmers.
Eric Mc said:
The atitude in big business seeems to be maximise profit AT ALL OPPORTUNITIES even if the product is inappropriate or right for the targetted customer.
So, meeting the customers needs is not the main objective. It is stiffing the customer at every opportunity.
I am all in favour of the free market and competition. Capitalism works great when businesses operate in that environment. Where it goes wrong is when competitiveness is stifled either by insuficient players in the marketplace or the players that are there operate a form of cartel to artificially "not-compete".
Far too much of the latter has been going on for far too long - and ordinary people have been dreadfully exploited and ripped off by these large institutions.
And it's not just the "f...wits". a term I think is dreadfully insulting to those who found themselves in these situations.
Very true, it is amazing how some in the banking sector refuse to acknowledge their own role in the public losing faith in them. A sense of basic decency to their customers rather than treating them as cash cows all the time would be very welcome.So, meeting the customers needs is not the main objective. It is stiffing the customer at every opportunity.
I am all in favour of the free market and competition. Capitalism works great when businesses operate in that environment. Where it goes wrong is when competitiveness is stifled either by insuficient players in the marketplace or the players that are there operate a form of cartel to artificially "not-compete".
Far too much of the latter has been going on for far too long - and ordinary people have been dreadfully exploited and ripped off by these large institutions.
And it's not just the "f...wits". a term I think is dreadfully insulting to those who found themselves in these situations.
I think part of the point - certainly for me was the rhetoric accompanying the small print...
Ok I should have read the small print but, when your personal banker (who at the time I had known since being a student c. 12 years) say you need to take PPI out with your car loan - I believed her....
any insurance is a moribund subject ostensibly for most people, but for me it boils down to a difference between the relationship approach of a person sat with you saying one thing and a booklet of fine print to read...
once the car arrived I wasn't admittedly too interested in a 28 day cooling off period..
surely if banks thought they had got it right they wouldn't have made billions of provisions in their accounts - right or wrong they admitted it wasn't the correct process..
Ok I should have read the small print but, when your personal banker (who at the time I had known since being a student c. 12 years) say you need to take PPI out with your car loan - I believed her....
any insurance is a moribund subject ostensibly for most people, but for me it boils down to a difference between the relationship approach of a person sat with you saying one thing and a booklet of fine print to read...
once the car arrived I wasn't admittedly too interested in a 28 day cooling off period..
surely if banks thought they had got it right they wouldn't have made billions of provisions in their accounts - right or wrong they admitted it wasn't the correct process..
Eric Mc said:
I am not of the opinion that people should suffer just because they are not savvy. In fact, they need to be protected from themselves to some extent - especially when it somes to sharp practice by immoral or unscrupulous "salesmen" - which is what the banks had become.
It was a right mess and scandalous.
^^^^^^ Yup, simple as that.It was a right mess and scandalous.
Sadly history tells us that "salesman" will tell you anything (or hide anything) in order to make their sale and pocket their slice of pie. See also mis-selling by the energy utilities.
It's all part of the bigger problem of banks giving up being banks and deciding to retail financial services instead. See also Adam Applegarth.
. ? As one doesSoovy said:
Oh come on Eric.
I am equally appalled at the moral vacuum of clients, who while they're making money are quite prepared to claim that they are sophisticated investors, and as soon as their trade go tits they are poor Irish farmers.
In general there will only be one party making money and it won't be client ! I am equally appalled at the moral vacuum of clients, who while they're making money are quite prepared to claim that they are sophisticated investors, and as soon as their trade go tits they are poor Irish farmers.
I used to be losely involved in this industry (I worked for an online introducer). Loans were made at loss making rates, with the profit only being made by the PPI on top. The point is that the sales process was such that people did not appreciate they were being sold insurance in any form. They were misled, hardly surprising when the commission rates for PPI loans were 3x that for non PPI.
I still remember our 'best' introducer commission to a broker - £100,000 for a remortgage with full ppi. Bear in mind this was half the commission the broker we passed the applicant's details to.
Everyone in the industry knew the game would end at some point...
I still remember our 'best' introducer commission to a broker - £100,000 for a remortgage with full ppi. Bear in mind this was half the commission the broker we passed the applicant's details to.
Everyone in the industry knew the game would end at some point...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff