Burgess slams nil refund clause
- 8TH JUNE 2007
While Simon Burgess from specialist payment protection insurance (PPI) provider British Insurance has praised the Financial Services Authority’s intervention into the payment protection sector, he has recently criticised them and accused them by saying they have done nothing short of betraying the consumer.
Harsh words you might think considering they are looking into providing a better future for those purchasing payment protection insurance.
However, Simon’s anger is at the recent FSA ruling regarding the ‘nil refund’ clause. While the Financial Services Authority have said that in future “nil” refund policies will be outlawed, Simon believes that Financial Services Authority have ignored key issues relating to this.
The nil refund clause was embedded in single premium payment protection insurance policies. With these policies, the premium is paid upfront, which means that the consumer couldn’t claim a refund on the policy if they chose to cancel it.
The main question that Simon is asking is why the Financial Services Authority hasn’t agreed with major providers of the protection insurance that the consumer should receive a refund on the amount of interest they have paid along with the premium, on a pro-rata basis. With this new ruling, providers can chose how much they actually refund to the customer, explains Simon. “This could mean that they still keep 99% of the money due back and refund just 1%”.
Perhaps if there were more people like Simon who weren’t afraid to speak their mind and stand up for the consumer then the sector wouldn’t be in the mess it is right now.
So when it comes to purchasing payment protection insurance you don’t need advising who to go and see.
