CPP claims to start this month

York Press: CPP claims to start this month CPP claims to start this month

SEVEN million people who were missold cover for bank and credit cards by York-based CPP can begin making claims from later this month, the City regulator has announced.

According to the Financial Conduct Authority, eligible customers who bought CPP – card protection plan – products will begin receiving claim forms this month, with the first payouts expected from late March.

The level of redress for each person will depend on the length of the time they had the products.

The FCA said customers did not need to use the services of a claims management company or law firm to complete a claim, but forms must be returned by August 30, after which claims will not be considered.

Clive Adamson, director of supervision, said: “If you believe you were missold one of these protection products, fill out and return the claim form to make sure you get your money back. Don’t put it off till the last minute.”

CPP was fined £10.5 million in November 2012 after regulators found it gave misleading and unclear information about credit card and identity theft insurance.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:28pm Wed 5 Feb 14

petethefeet says...

The FSA charge against CPP was one of scaremongering, i.e. they told prospective customers that the risk of banking/identity-Cri
me was greater than it was. But 'hey', the whole financial industry had gone bonkers during these days and the FSA/Government stood by and did nothing. So, the industry got the message that they could do what they wanted. Tell me, does this not smack of yet another case of the government closing the stable door long after they effectively opened it? It's very much akin to the situation of all these stars appearing in court 40 years after the alleged offences. The 'norm' of the day let them get away with it! Unlike the stars of the BBC, it's not the offenders of yesteryear that's paying for this belated redress.
The FSA charge against CPP was one of scaremongering, i.e. they told prospective customers that the risk of banking/identity-Cri me was greater than it was. But 'hey', the whole financial industry had gone bonkers during these days and the FSA/Government stood by and did nothing. So, the industry got the message that they could do what they wanted. Tell me, does this not smack of yet another case of the government closing the stable door long after they effectively opened it? It's very much akin to the situation of all these stars appearing in court 40 years after the alleged offences. The 'norm' of the day let them get away with it! Unlike the stars of the BBC, it's not the offenders of yesteryear that's paying for this belated redress. petethefeet

8:57am Thu 6 Feb 14

piemagico says...

petethefeet wrote:
The FSA charge against CPP was one of scaremongering, i.e. they told prospective customers that the risk of banking/identity-Cri

me was greater than it was. But 'hey', the whole financial industry had gone bonkers during these days and the FSA/Government stood by and did nothing. So, the industry got the message that they could do what they wanted. Tell me, does this not smack of yet another case of the government closing the stable door long after they effectively opened it? It's very much akin to the situation of all these stars appearing in court 40 years after the alleged offences. The 'norm' of the day let them get away with it! Unlike the stars of the BBC, it's not the offenders of yesteryear that's paying for this belated redress.
Is your point that it's OK to do anything you like as long as the police/regulator is asleep on the job?
[quote][p][bold]petethefeet[/bold] wrote: The FSA charge against CPP was one of scaremongering, i.e. they told prospective customers that the risk of banking/identity-Cri me was greater than it was. But 'hey', the whole financial industry had gone bonkers during these days and the FSA/Government stood by and did nothing. So, the industry got the message that they could do what they wanted. Tell me, does this not smack of yet another case of the government closing the stable door long after they effectively opened it? It's very much akin to the situation of all these stars appearing in court 40 years after the alleged offences. The 'norm' of the day let them get away with it! Unlike the stars of the BBC, it's not the offenders of yesteryear that's paying for this belated redress.[/p][/quote]Is your point that it's OK to do anything you like as long as the police/regulator is asleep on the job? piemagico

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree