Mortgage Plevin PPI Check
IT’S NOT THE END OF PPI CLAIMS
Banks and lenders have been selling mortgage payment protection insurance (MPPI) to their customers over the last couple of decades, netting the banks huge sums in profit. MPPI, in many cases was being forced upon customers who did not need it, or it was added to the mortgage without the customers consent or knowledge. The purpose of MPPI was to help safeguard mortgage repayments due to unemployment or were out of work because of an accident or sickness.
Although the deadline for making mis-sold PPI claims has expired, banks and lenders are now facing hefty payouts in what is being dubbed, ‘PPI 2’ and unfair relationship or hidden high commission PPI claims. The basis of commission claims was initially decided in a landmark judgement issued by the Supreme court in 2014 commonly known as the Plevin ruling. However there have been other subsequent landmark rulings in high commission PPI cases which have brought forward further clarification for claimants and is likely to open the floodgates to the mortgage related Plevin PPI claims.
What is the Plevin Ruling?
In the case of Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd, Mrs Susan Plevin discovered that 71.8% of her PPI premium was actually commission that was taken by Paragon for the sale of the policy. The Supreme Court ruled that this was a breach of the Consumer Credit Act as Mrs Plevin was unaware of the high rate of commission, and had she known of this she may not have taken out the PPI policy. Ruling in her favour, the court ordered Paragon Finance to refund Susan Plevin the commission she paid with compensatory interest.
Read the full Plevin ruling here : https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2014-0037-judgment.pdf
Potter V Canada Square - New ruling April 2021
The case of Canada Square Operations Limited v Beverley Potter [2020] brought a degree of clarity to the issue of limitation points in Plevin Litigation. This judgment was welcomed by law firms, claims management companies and claimants alike as it strengthened the claimant's argument that these claims should not have a limitation period applied to them due to the concealment of PPI commission levels. This meant that claims are no longer confined to a six-year limitation period from when your credit card/loan/mortgage or other finance ended.
Potter V Canada Square Ruling - April 2021
If Your Mortgage Provider Charged Unfair Commission On Your PPI Policy, Incorrectly Rejected Your PPI Claim, Or Miscalculated Your Redress Payment, You May Be Due Compensation.
