Make it your NY Resolution to get back what you’re owed
We’re all feeling the pinch after the festive period. However did you know there’s a good chance that you could still be owed hundreds or even thousands in payment protection insurance compensation? Solicitor Paul Cahill explains how reclaiming PPI could help relieve the January blues:
“It’s hard to remember a time when we weren’t talking about some form of financial mis selling, particularly that of payment protection insurance. Yet here we are at the start of another new year and there are still people who are owed PPI compensation.
“2014 revealed yet more bad practice deployed by the banks regarding PPI compensation; 2.5m claims are now to be reopened after the Financial Conduct Authority discovered banks had been wrongly rejecting or underpaying on PPI claims.
“This wasn’t the only area of bad play; a BBC investigation revealed that lenders have miscalculated charges triggered by PPI premiums. One example given was that of an MBNA credit card holder who received £5,800 in compensation when in reality they should have received around £13,000.
“This means that even those who have reclaimed PPI could be owed further compensation, money which could prove to be incredible useful particularly when the post Christmas bills start to arrive.
“We’re so frustrated with banks continuously looking for ways to minimise the repercussions of PPI mis selling that we’re offering to pay for a Subject Access Request (SAR) for all our clients. This allows us to go in and check all their financial agreements to see if there are any existing PPI policies which could be due compensation as well as any other financial products such as mis sold packaged bank accounts.
“We work on a no win no fee basis. This means you do not pay anything unless your claim is successful. We will not bill you for the SAR if your claim is unsuccessful nor will we add it to the bill at the end if it is. In fact our service is proving to be so successful we’ve recently extended our teams handling these claims!”
Content correct at time of publication