01254 82288001254 822880
We often get asked many and varied questions regarding the ‘Plevin’ claims and we hope that if you have any questions we can provide the answer below.
If you can’t find the answer below please feel free to contact us and we will be happy to assist.
Susan Plevin, who’s case against her lender, Paragon Finance, went to the Supreme Court and the judgment opened the lid on exactly the PPI commissions scandal.
When your bank or lender added PPI to your loan / credit card / hire purchase / mortgage / store card it obtained a commission from the insurance provider.
It has now been discovered that the average commission was 67%!!! Yes, 67%!
So, for every £ you paid towards the PPI policy, which you probably didn’t want, need or ask for, 67p was pure commission.
We haven’t seen one single instance where the bank told the customer how much commission it was making.
The reason, if you think about it, is obvious.
We doubt any customer would’ve ever taken out a PPI policy had they known that 67% of it was commission to the bank for selling it.
The billions of pounds of profit proved too tempting to the banks, so they simply decided not to tell their customers.
The Supreme Court judged that not declaring the commission to the customer was unfair as the customer was denied the information required in order to make an informed decision as to whether the policy represented value for money.
What should have happened next and what did happen next are two very different things in our opinion.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulates the financial sector and sets the rules that banks must follow.
The Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) uses these rules when dealing with disputes between customers and banks.
We believe the FCA should’ve implemented rules which stated that if a bank failed to disclose what commission it was making by selling a PPI policy then the customer should be refunded the entire cost of the policy plus interest.
Instead, the FCA implemented rules which stated that a bank only needed to refund anything above 50% commission.
As the average commission was 67% of the total cost of the policy this means that only 17% had to be refunded.
One of the main benefits of a Group Action is the cost.
With funding in place to cover the cost of the action, courtesy of RGL Management, and the added protection of ATE (after the event) insurance there is no cost to the customers with cases in the Group Action in the unlikely event that it is lost.
No case is too small to be added to the Group Action, whereas other avenues will only be open to high value cases.
The funding also enables top tier solicitors to lead the case rather than lower tier solicitors which generally run individual cases.
With the funding in place and top tier solicitors leading the action we are confident your case is in the very best of hands.
Your Money Claim, RGL Management and Humphries Kerstetter LLP.
To learn a little more about each company please take a look here.
A Group Litigation Action is a complex legal case and would be submitted to the High Court via a top tier firm of solicitors, and therefore strict legal protocol both prior and during any case must be adhered to.
This inevitably means that cases can take months to conclude but we will update you as soon as there are any significant updates and you can track which stage your case is up to via an online portal.
If your case shows as ‘Accepted’ your case has been checked and verified by RGL Management as having all of the relevant documentation, which has been supplied by Your Money Claim.
It is then waiting for the next tranche of cases to be issued to the relevant bank.
Once your case shows as ‘With Lawyers’ your case has been accepted and is part of one of the ongoing actions.
It is just a case of patience then, and we know it can be frustrating but we are sure the wait will be worthwhile given the expertise of the legal team in place.
We understand that the above may not have answered all of your questions, as there are many questions we are asked.
If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact us and we’d be happy to answer them for you.
Supreme Court Ruling into undeclared PPI commmissions- Plevin versus Paragon Finance Limited
Financial Conduct Authority guidance to banks and confirmation of average commissions
2018 Court Case into unfair PPI commissions- Doran versus Paragaon Finance Limited
2019 Court Case into unfair PPI commissions- Akhtar versus Welcome Financial Services Limited
