Adamsonslaw.co.uk are specialists in all types of financial mis-selling claims such as PPI, bank charges or interest rate swap agreements and much more.
If you have been mis-sold insurance, have had default charges applied to your account or have an enquiry about any claim related to the financial industry then we have the experience and expertise to deal with your claim.
One of the most popular claims we make are for Payment Protection Claims (PPI) where the customer has paid insurance premiums to cover their monthly installments if they are unable to work or become ill. The lender may decline to make these payments for whatever reasons or the customer may not have even known the premiums were being charged. As a result the insurance policy was unsuitable and the customer is entitled to a refund of all the premiums they have paid plus statutory interest.
We also help customers reclaim default charges applied for missing a payment or if it was late. In law these are unfair and this unenforceable if they are higher than the actual cost to the firm who has charged it.
We have experts in the specialist area of interest rate swap agreement claims where a business customer has been sold insurance linked to investments and the interest rate where the customer was told they are protected against increased interest rates. However it was not properly explained what would happen if the interest rate fell and many found they were paying more.
Call us on 0161 694 2750 for a free chat.
There has been a lot of talk lately of PPI (Payment Protection Insurance) and some people are unsure of exactly what it relates to. PPI is the insurance policy sold by lending institutions to loan and credit card customers in order to protect them if they were to lose their jobs or if they were not able to work for an extended period due to illness or an accident. PPI has been big business for banks and there are approximately 25 million policies in existence in the UK valued at around 5 billion per year.
However, many customers have been disillusioned and short changed as soon as they have had to make a claim on their policy and many claims were declined under various clauses. This led the FSA (Financial Services Authority) to investigate the policies. It first published its report into PPI mis-selling in November 2005 and identified poor selling practices and lack of compliance controls in the PPI market. The investigations continued until May 2009 when single policy sales were banned and restrictions and regulations imposed on such policies. The banks sought a Judicial Review against these measures in October 2010 and in April 2011 the High Court ruled against the banks, who decided not to appeal against the judgment.
A shocking fact unveiled by the FSA found that only 9% of the policies would pay if a claim was made, particularly for the unemployed or sick, the exact reasons why such policies were taken.
The media reporting of widespread mis-selling led to a sharp rise in the number of people claiming back payment protection insurance and on average 80% of claims are upheld.
It is estimated that the total cost of PPI claims could cost the banks 19 bn in refunds and compensation. Your refund could be among this.
Here at Adamsons Law, we will help you claim back PPI and most claims will be allowed as far back as six years as current legislation stands. However, we have found that many banks will refund from when the policy was first taken, in excess of this limitation.
Adamsons Law have experts in place to help you get back all or most of your premiums. Call us now on 0161 694 2750
In addition to PPI, we also help you to reclaim other mis-sold financial products such as insurance policies or loans, including mortgages. Talk to us first if you are not sure.
Default charges is an ongoing issue between firms and consumers and relate to the fees and charges applied to a customer making a payment late, missing a payment or not having enough money in an account to make a payment.
Prior to around November 2009, many banks charged customers approximately 25 to 40 for returning a payment such as direct debit or cheque if the customer did not have enough money to pay for the item. However, since a supreme court case in 2009, many banks reduced their charges to a daily amount of around 6 per day per item subject to a monthly limit.
Prior to around June 2009, many credit card providers charged approximately 25 for a missed or late payment. This was reduced to 12 following an investigation by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) though they did not report that 12 was fair but a level over which they may investigate the firm. Therefore even this amount is open to challenge by the customer.
The law behind unfair and therefore unenforceable charges and fees is that the amount should be a reasonable estimate to reflect the firm's administrative costs only and not make a profit. In legal terms, a firm is entitled to recover liquidated damages as a result of the customer's breach of contract but cannot be unjustly enriched. The charge or fee must be reasonable.
There is both primary legislation such as the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and common law precedents to enforce the customer's position. It follows that any clause or term which allows the firm to be unjustly enriched is unenforceable, i.e. the firm cannot lawfully impose that amount.
Many mortgage accounts also incur default charges and these can be reclaimed in the same way as charges on a credit card account because the same laws apply.
NOTE: Since the supreme court case of November 2009 relating to CURRENT ACCOUNT CHARGES only these are very difficult to reclaim from a bank. To put it briefly, the banks won the case on the point that charges for exceeding an overdraft (0 to an agreed limit) have always formed part of the account but are only charged when the trigger event occurs, i.e. the customer is overdrawn.
The above case did not assess any other terms and conditions, such as for business accounts, credit cards or mortgage accounts so these can be reclaimed as per law. However, we are aware that many banks will quote the above court case as a reasons to decline your complaint in this instance talk to us on 0161 694 2750 as this is incorrect.
It is estimated that the total cost of claims could cost the banks billions in refunds and compensation. Your refund could be among this.
REMEMBER: The same laws apply to ANY CHARGE OR FEE which is higher than the firm's actual costs. If you are not sure talk to us first !!
Some consumers may feel they were mis-sold their mortgage or loan and that it should not have been provided to them. Problems have arisen due to the recession and falling house prices resulting in negative equity (the value of the house is lower than the mortgage).
Some of the reasons for a mis-sold mortgage or loan are:
Call us now on 0161 694 2750 to discuss your mortgage.
An interest rate swap agreement (IRSA) is a complex financial product. Interest rate swaps have been aggressively sold by major banks to their small to medium business (SME) customers from as early as 2001. The most aggressive period that interest rate swap products were sold was between 2006 to 2008.
The selling of interest rate swap products was hugely profitable for the banks. Sold on a massive scale, it has become clear that a number of major banking institutions have been involved in mis-selling financial hedging products on a massive systematic scale. These interest rate swaps were sold as the ideal interest rate protection product guarding against the financial consequences of interest rate rises. There has been huge media interest in this area since April 2013.
The FSA reviewed these products and has worked alongside major banks to determine how the products were sold. As a result, the FSA have announced a compensation scheme for customers who have been mis-sold these products.
How did the banks mis-sell IRSAs? Banks offering loans to SME customers often included a condition that required businesses to enter into interest rate swaps. This was often for much greater amounts and over a longer term than was necessary given the amount and term of the loan.
Banks also offered the products as being a protection against interest rate rises, but failed to properly advise the customers what would happen if interest rates fell below the floor in the agreement. In such cases, the customer ending up paying more interest!
Banks also failed to properly consider the needs of the customer and whether the products being offered were suitable for the customers business. Many customers simply did not understand the complex financial derivatives they were being sold as an investment.
It is estimated that the total cost of claims could cost the banks 4.5bn in refunds and compensation. Your refund could be among this.
Remedies against the banks may include damages, a refund of payments made and compensation to put the business into the same financial position of not having been sold the interest rate product in the first place.
Adamsons Law have experts in place to help you get back all or most of your losses. Call us now on 0161 694 2750.