Single premium policy- Double the profit for fat cat bankers!

Hi readers, I’m Gemma and I manage the investigation team here at Gladstone Brookes, basically my team work on getting your decision for you.

Over the coming weeks you will hear quite a bit from me! In my job role, one of the most frequently asked questions is; do I have a good chance of success with my claim? What I want us to look at over the next few weeks is the tell-tale signs of your PPI being mis-sold.

There are many issues that the banks come under scrutiny for when it comes to the way in which they have sold (or more to the point mis-sold!), PPI to their customers. The subjects we will touch upon over the next few weeks will include:

  • Single Premium policies
  • The unemployed, retired and Students
  • The self employed, agency staff and part time workers
  • Pre-existing medical conditions,
  • Those already Covered

I’ll also be talking about cost, restrictions how PPI is optional nature of the policy and how a lot of you don’t even know if you have PPI in the first place!

As you can see there is a lot to cover! My bugbear, however, is the beast that is the single premium policy so where best to start than here.

Single Premium Policies

When we start a case,we request that clients’ provide us with as much information about their cases as they have, in order to build as strong a case as possible so we can be successful in claiming back loan insurance. On reviewing clients’ credit agreements, time and time again the same issue arises; many of you have been sold your policies on a ”single premium” basis.

Let me explain this, you buy your loan and pay it back in monthly repayments with interest added at the agreed rate for example 15%, which is fine (and usually shown on your loan agreement as part a). Single premium means you are paying the whole price upfront in a lump sum, which most people cannot afford, hence the reason for getting loan in the first place! But not only that they will then charge you interest on your “loan for loan protection” at the prevailing rate of your loan.

Two loans not one!

Essentially selling you two loans, the one you wanted and the one for the loan protection; lining the pockets of the bankers at a tidy rate!(this will often show as part b followed by part c showing the whole amount payable in monthly breakdowns.)

Now obviously if all this was explained upfront, the majority of people would not wish to purchase a policy on a single premium basis and be paying through the nose for it! If you did want this cover you would surely rather a pay as you go policy where interest was not added on to your policy? If you have been sold on a single premium basis, this is a strong indication that the policy has not been sold correctly.

Check Your Credit Agreement Now!

So have a read through you credit agreement when you get a minute and if your policy has been sold in this way then contact Gladstone Brookes to see if we can help you or why not use our online claims form and we will get back to you.

In the meantime, I would really like to hear from you on any issues you have had with PPI, whatever it is. Have uyou been successful with it? Have you tried to cancel your PPI but found it’s not been as straight forward as you would think? Have you experienced problems with a particular bank?

Whatever your experience is, share it with us; the likelihood is, you’re not on your own. These policies have been institutionally mis-sold against the instructions of the banks’ governing body – The Financial Service Authority (FSA), against the advice of the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) and in a lot of cases against the wishes of you, their customers.

Voice your views and be heard!

Bye for now,

Gemma

Posted in loans, PPI | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>