View more on these topics

FCA set to cave in on PPI claims deadline

FCA logo glass 2 620x430

The FCA is set to back calls from the banks for a two-year deadline on bringing claims for missold payment protection insurance despite warnings from its own staff.

The Times reports internal FCA documents which suggest a shift in thinking at the regulator which supports the introduction of a cut-off date for PPI complaints.

In October, the FCA argued the current open-ended approach to complaints means consumers who intended to complain have not yet got around to doing so.

It also said many complaints are coming from claims management firms, with complaints relating to pre-2005 and pre-2000 cases where there are gaps in records.

Since January 2011, a total of £24.2bn has been paid out in redress for missold PPI. The FCA has yet to announce its final decision on whether to impose a claims deadline.

Staff have warned the FCA would be inadequate and did not comply with rules on treating customers fairly.

Internal documents show regulatory staff have said a deadline could only be imposed if banks wrote to customers about the possibility of claiming for missold PPI, which the banks have not done.

An FCA spokesman told the newspaper its consultation over a PPI claims deadline “was designed to encourage all stakeholders to share their views.”


FCA interior logo 620x430

FCA fines lender £2.4m over PPI complaints failure

The FCA has fined CT Capital £2.4m for serious failings in its treatment of payment protection insurance complaints. CT Capital was the parent company of a group of lenders and loan brokers and sold around 31,000 PPI policies between 2005 and 2008. It received £63m in commission as a result. However, the regulator says the […]

Clock money 620 x 430

Banks to foot bill for £42m PPI awareness campaign

A campaign to raise awareness of a new deadline on complaints for missold payment protection insurance could be funded by lenders, according to a consultation paper from the FCA. In documents published today, the FCA proposes a two-year campaign to forewarn consumers of a 2018 halt on complaints, which it estimates would cost £42.2m. The […]


Lloyds sets aside £600m for PPI and branch misselling

Lloyds Banking Group has set aside a further £500m to cover further payment protection insurance redress and £100m for misselling through its bank branches. In the three months to the end of September, pre-tax profits surged 28 per cent to £958m, up from £751m during the same period last year. The bank has now earmarked […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 11 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Andrew Horlock 16th June 2016 at 9:19 am

    So impose a deadline on PPI claims, but allow the FOS to review and fine St James Place over a pension mortgage sold 22 years ago. Something needs to be done I tell you.

  2. For the love of God, has anyone not been asked “were you miss sold PPI”. Even if you don’t own a phone, computer you must have walked passed some stand and been asked the question.

    This is a joke, just like the legal long stop, FSCS policy levy they don’t want to be seen changing any law, legislation that MIGHT cost the consumer money. They have had more than enough time to claim, more than enough notices, draw a line in the sand and get on with it. Its like a DFS sale, will it ever end, will I live long enough to see it completed?

  3. The regulator, of course, has not been told by the Treasury to go easy on the banks.

  4. There’s a post-modern opera going round at the moment called Opera For The Unknown Woman, in which ten women from the present are drawn by a mystical force to communicate with the last woman alive on Earth, 300 years in the future. This last vestige of humanity, name of Aphra, is about to be finished off by floods caused by man-made global warming, and the womyn of the present are drawn together to discuss how they can change society to save Aphra and future humanity from our present greedy and rapacious acts against etc etc etc.

    I believe it ends with the women of the present arranging for Aphra to successfully put in a claim for missold PPI, which she uses to buy some sandbags.

  5. Could not agree more with Andrew Horlock. It is a pathetic situation we find ourselves in, in our profession and no other business would have such a ridiculous set of conflicting rules between two sides of the regulator.

  6. Can there be anybody in this country – and possibly abroad – who has not noticed that PPI is a problem product?

    Is it feasible that the grasping claims management brigade have not somehow made multiple contacts with every breathing entity?

    We sometimes forget that the PPI saga taints the public perception of the industry to our collective detriment. Let’s not also forget that a number of tangential matters have arisen.

    1. Banks and other PPI sellers are paying compensation to people regardless of whether it has been missold. Apparently it is cheaper to do this, up to a certain level, than it is to actually investigate.

    2. This behaviour stimulates the avarice of both consumers and claims mongers. Those CMCs will be looking for other targets at which to aim their siren cries of mis-selling.

    Frankly, the time has come to say enough.

  7. This issue, if you look at it properly has not been created by consumers, it has been created by the firms that shouldn’t have sold the product to unsuspecting people in the first place! Like it or not consumers do not have time to investigate what they had that may have been miss-sold however long ago let alone remember what they previously had now they have moved on to mortgage, loan or credit card number 6, 7, 8 or 9 over the last 10 years!

    Enter the claims management companies who have jumped on the bandwagon to ‘help’ consumers regain what is rightfully theirs whilst taking a nice healthy slice of the pie in the process.

    If the banks and product providers want this over and done with, then they should have to go through their records on what THEY have miss-sold and just give it back to the consumer. There is nothing about this that is fair on people who have genuinely through no fault of their own been sold a product that they didn’t need in the first place, yet they are the ones who are being made responsible for having to claim it back (usually at a cost – be that money or time)!

    The banks created this problem, they should have to fix it and you know what, if some of those consumers end up getting back what they shouldn’t, then hey – that’s called divine retribution! It doesn’t make it right, but underhandedness clearly works both ways! If they do things ethically in the first place then hopefully these problems won’t occur in the future! Hmmm, maybe that’s just wishful thinking?

  8. I seem to remember that complaints could be barred after the later of 6 years after the event, or 3 years after they knew/should have known there was an issue.

    There is also the point that not all PPI Is automatically a mis sell.

  9. “Internal documents show regulatory staff have said a deadline could only be imposed if banks wrote to customers about the possibility of claiming for missold PPI, which the banks have not done.”

    What are they afraid of? A collapse of the banking system? Is that the only reason why the government didn’t order a full review of PPI?

  10. Clearly the claims management thing has gotten out of all control, but the proposals to a) introduce a deadline and b) cap fees to much lower levels will all but kill it off. That does not help consumers, it only helps the banks. Forcing CMCs to be up front and transparent about fees would allow competition forces to act. If we all believe in such interventions, lets have the government dictate allowable profit margins on all products and services starting with financial products….I thought not.

    Whilst I would agree it seems to many of us inconceivable that consumers are still not aware, reality proves different. The uproar over fees from CMCs is somewhat justified, but it also makes me laugh when one remembers that commission on the products was often north of 50% and that following Plevin, the FCA thought that the boor banks should be allowed to hang to some of it even when mis-selling was proven.

  11. […] from August of this year (August 2017) a nationwide advertising campaign, which will highlight a deadline for ppi claims to be made by August 2019, it is important that people fully understand what this deadline means […]

Leave a comment


Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm