Mr T took out a house loan in 1989 and his broker sorted PPI with the mortgage lender for him as a self-employed partner in business. Mr T specially asked if he would likely be covered as a self-employed individual and was informed without a doubt. The business failed, he tried to make a claim but was told the small print stipulated it merely insured individuals who were claiming lack of employment benefit.A self-employed male from London was attentive to tick the appropriate boxes, understand a PPI compensation guide and illustrate due diligence in doing his very best to make sure he met the criteria for cover. When new employment dried up for him he attempted to make a claim, merely to be told he would have to declare himself bankrupt before he would certainly be eligible.Mrs V from Essex made her mortgage loan cover claim after being made redundant from her well paid employment having made installments for 3 years. She duly signed on with the Job centre as a condition of her insurance plan although she believed it unrealistic that she would come across a job as well paid as her past position. This turned out to be the situation and following 3 months her Job centre consultant insisted she take a place as a Filing Clerk. Mrs V deemed this type of employment intolerable and unsurprisingly ceased going to the job centre and was therefore not able to pursue her claim.Individuals hoping to make PPI claims may possibly find the following cases practical in support with assessing the suitability of cover and the potential issues of either deliberate or unintended non-compliance with the small print!A study by the Citizens Advice Bureaux (CAB), published in September 2005 discovered that 85 per cent of those people that had tried to utilize their PPI plan had been unsuccessful and had their own request rejected. Though perhaps not typical or representative of the bigger view the CAB results make salutary reading.

PPI claims, True Cases And The Outcomes Of PPI CompensationMrs T from London stipulated that she was encouraged to take out insurance policy when she took out a mortgage loan. When she hesitated over this the ‘helpful’ advisor advised it would likely be a excellent concept ‘just in case’. At this point she is pregnant and unsurprisingly, is not covered for maternity leave.Mr S from Eastbourne along with his better half had home loan insurance on a £200,000 personal loan. Mr S lost his job but was incapable to meet the criteria for Job seekers allowance because his assets were far too substantial. Having payed off £60 each month for protection which didn’t materialise, Mr S said he felt conned.