Pinnacle Card Insurance - AIB issuing refunds for oversold product

Tigerandahalf

I got a letter about this today. There has been several threads in this forum down through the years and the Central Bank eventually pulled them up over it.
Apparently they are going to refund payment plus compensatory interest. What does this entail?
I note they want you to sign off on it so you have no further legal claim against them.

johnp

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I got a letter about this today. There has been several threads in this forum down through the years and the Central Bank eventually pulled them up over it.
Apparently they are going to refund payment plus compensatory interest. What does this entail?
I note they want you to sign off on it so you have no further legal claim against them.

Just got the letter myself. I was curious about the signing off and no further claim bit. My first thought was "what are they hiding?"!
Surely you don't need to sign that form to make a claim. I'm not a legal person, but if you've been missold something any claim made shouldn't exempt you from anything else that comes out in the future?

Tigerandahalf

This is what I am wondering. I find it curious why they are doing that. Are they afraid of a major action being taken. I see solicitors in the uk heavily advertising re ppi (payment protection insurance) claims.

newacc2015

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

This is what I am wondering. I find it curious why they are doing that. Are they afraid of a major action being taken. I see solicitors in the uk heavily advertising re ppi (payment protection insurance) claims.

I cant imagine that being the case here. We dont really get class action suits like the UK. I cant imagine AIB are hiding anything, as they the CB know what they did was wrong and thats why they are giving compensation

Tigerandahalf

The banks in Ireland and across the western world have been absolutely wreckless. David Drumm is the face of the type of people running them.
PPI was charged on people in Ireland who took out mortgages and loans. These people were fleeced for money every month and the banks ended up having to making refunds with an average in the low thousands.
What I refer to in the title was sold when people took out credit cards. Here the refund will be small with claims averaging around 66eur according to the Irish media.
Still the banks were reckless around that time period. The banks can't lose as if they are fined they just pass on the cost to customers thus the regulator is limited in what it can do.

Terpsichorean Master

I received one of these letters a few weeks back also; and in mine it states that I have to return it "by 01/10/15 so that we can process your refund".

Does anyone know whether or not this date is set in stone or is it likely to just be an administrative boundary assigned so as to make it easier for themselves?
(i.e. to just be processing a certain amount of claims at any given time)

Also, does anyone know what are the options with regard to making a further claim?
Is it possible and is anyone doing it; or has anyone even heard it being discussed or have more information about it?


I heard a guy being interviewed on the radio recently who is suing one of the Irish banks here, can't remember which one off-hand, after being systematically overcharged on his mortgage; he's a solicitor and when the bank attempted to offer him a paltry settlement in relation to the €60,000+ that they'd defrauded him of over a number of years, 8/9 if memory serves - I think to the tune of 10% compensation plus a refund of the amount overcharged - and ensure that, much like this very instance, his right to claim would thus be nullified, he decided to take a legal action against them.

He did this, he said, because he understood the law and that after engaging with the bank initially and realising that their approach was again the very same with regard to the compensation, as it had been with the fraud in the first instance - i.e. to keep their customers ignorant so as to service the bank's interests at their expense, effectively screwing them as much as possible (I'm paraphrasing but that was more or less it) as their default position - that he was going to use his professional legal knowledge to ensure that, not only would they not get away with trying to do that to him and that they would pay a high price for attempting to do so, but that those who didn't know the law as well as him wouldn't remain vulnerable to their continuing predatory practices in this situation either, as a result of his action.


The reason I say this, is that this whole process regarding the Pinnacle Card Insurance is being handled in exactly the same manner by AIB et al, IMO. The banks are trying to pay everyone off cheaply and quickly, with only the most cursory of informatory engagement, and by doing so are removing/denuding people's right to claim further or to be compensated on anyone else's terms, other than the bank's - which is exactly how they want it. They've decided how much you should be compensated - and at what rate - for their malfeasance; but yet they don't even see fit to inform you of what that actually is or how that works in advance?

Just, here's the form, sign it and send it back and we'll give you a "refund"; you can trust us that it'll be fair - even though we're the one's responsible for misleading you and using the subsequent confusion and/or misinformation to take your money in the first place. Well no, sorry; I don't ....... think so!

Just to clarify, the letter states that they are "establishing a voluntary redress scheme", when even the most clueless customer knows that they are, in fact, being forced to do so by the Irish Central Bank. Their rhetoric is of the style that I'm being "given an opportunity to claim a refund of premiums paid" and that to receive such I just have to "request a refund", i.e. the onus is on me to request this, which, although I could be wrong (does anyone know for sure?), seems to me to be how that would/could then nullify any further legal claim that I might have; and that if I enter into this 'scheme', that they "will return all premiums paid [...] plus compensatory interest" - without so much as a mention of what the compensatory interest rate is or how it will be applied; indeed it isn't ever referred to or mentioned again in any other way. Even the fact that it's overall being designated a 'refund', rather than the compensation it's supposed to actually be, comes across much like a legal dodge IMO.

And, after seven odd years of the whole country being saddled with enormous debt due to these institutions and their ongoing reckless policies; and the utter absence of repercussions for past or deterrents for future behaviour(s) and how that has translated to a thousand and one increasing social, personal and economic costs and decreasing services/facilities/provisions etc. in all of our lives; and, on a personal bank-customer level, the ever-increasing extra account 'service' costs that suddenly appeared in my dealings with them and that just keep growing as they freely and without compunction pass on the cost to customers during their 'return to profitably' - all of which is happening at our expense anyway, yet again; so something needs to change! As such, I've had just about enough of having to tolerate this and am only too willing to take any available opportunity to soften their cough and make them pay for their ongoing arrogant attitude, pattern-of-behaviour 'incompetency' and systematic avariciousness, if at all I can.


So, if anyone knows anything about how someone might engage with a cost-effective means (considering that I paid this premium for nine years @ €16 p.a., plus whatever the 'compensatory interest' might be, so it's not a large sum they're offering - less than €200 I'd imagine) of developing a further legal claim against them, or if there's any appetite or opportunity for whatever equivalent of a class-action suit is available here, I'd love to know - all and any information to be most gratefully received indeed!


Thanks in advance!

Tigerandahalf

Your post sums up exactly how I feel. I am sick of the way the banks can ride roughshod over people with the taxpayer bailing them out.
I think it is high time that depositors took the hit for these problems...then the banks would have to be a lot more careful as depositors would force them to be more accountable. The problem though is that all the banks are at ans where do depositors go then. It is a complete sham.
What you have said re the letter is so true and proves that the central bank is toothless and incapable of reigning in the banks.

Terpsichorean Master

You and me both feel that way; and the utter absence of any proper accountability, deterrent or recourse just shows what a joke bank regulation in this country continues to be.

I'm not sure what you mean wrt 'depositors' though, surely aren't we, the banks' customers, the depositors?
If so, I certainly don't agree that we should take a further 'hit' for this; we all already did as a society to the tune of €64 billion+ and I, and many more like me, already am/are on an ongoing basis in my everyday dealings with AIB; I'm definitely not willing to in any way countenance an increase in liability beyond that, as that's already unjust, immoral and unacceptable, not to mind illegal IMO.

Correct me if I'm wrong wrt my understanding of what you meant here when you say depositors though, that's just how it came across to me.

Terpsichorean Master

Terpsichorean Master wrote: »

I received one of these letters a few weeks back also; and in mine it states that I have to return it "by 01/10/15 so that we can process your refund".


Does anyone know whether or not this date - 1st Oct. - is set in stone or is it likely to just be an administrative boundary assigned so as to make it easier for themselves?
(i.e. to just be processing a certain amount of claims at any given time)

Also, does anyone know what are the options with regard to making a further claim?
Is it possible and is anyone doing it; or has anyone even heard it being discussed or have more information about it?

[...]

So, if anyone knows anything about how someone might engage with a cost-effective means (considering that I paid this premium for nine years @ €16 p.a., plus whatever the 'compensatory interest' might be, so it's not a large sum they're offering - less than €200 I'd imagine) of developing a further legal claim against them, or if there's any appetite or opportunity for whatever equivalent of a class-action suit is available here, I'd love to know - all and any information to be most gratefully received indeed!

Also, does anyone have any further info wrt the questions I posited in my original post above?

The due date for the return of the form is upcoming - 1st Oct. - and I'd appreciate any insight anyone can give as to what other options there are available for resolving this, if any!

Thanks in advance!

Tigerandahalf

I haven't sent my form back yet. I was hoping for more responses here.

Re depositors
Yes I believe depositors should take the hit for these bank failings. Perhaps shareholders should take the first hit but then deposits (over 100, 000 maybe). That way the banks would have to run themselves properly. No taxpayer bailout.
When you look at the banking collapse in Ireland it is the young generation and those with massive mortgages who have paid the price. Shareholders were wiped out but depositors paid no price. If they had the banks (and depositors) might be more careful in how their money is managed.
Anyway to get back on topic hopefully a few more will come on and add their experiences to this thread.

_Kaiser_

So called them today on their "dedicated customer helpline" to see what the story is..

Unfortunately though the staff answering the calls can't answer the obvious question - "how much?" - and can only escalate it to an "assessment team", nor can they answer the other questions..

- why the deadline for return of applications? What happens after that date? Do you lose your chance for the free money??
- why are customers being asked to apply for money they are apparently entitled to?
- why would I sign something waiving any further rights/claims without having the details first? Is that not the whole problem originally.. that customers were signing things without the full facts

So now I'm waiting on a callback tomorrow.. Will update the thread then

johnp

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

So called them today on their "dedicated customer helpline" to see what the story is..

Unfortunately though the staff answering the calls can't answer the obvious question - "how much?" - and can only escalate it to an "assessment team", nor can they answer the other questions..

- why the deadline for return of applications? What happens after that date? Do you lose your chance for the free money??
- why are customers being asked to apply for money they are apparently entitled to?
- why would I sign something waiving any further rights/claims without having the details first? Is that not the whole problem originally.. that customers were signing things without the full facts

So now I'm waiting on a callback tomorrow.. Will update the thread then

Fair play Kaiser.
Be clear though, it's not free money. You were oversold a product and are due your money back + compensation.

I look forward to hearing their answers.

_Kaiser_

johnp wrote: »

Fair play Kaiser.
Be clear though, it's not free money. You were oversold a product and are due your money back + compensation.

I look forward to hearing their answers.

Oh I know.. I was exaggerating for effect because if you read the way it's phrased it very much seems to be a "don't miss out, act now!" vibe

Terpsichorean Master

You and me both, re responses; but it seems they're slow to be forthcoming unfortunately.

As far as your view wrt depositors goes, I couldn't disagree more. Aren't we all already paying the price, or where is that €64 billion ultimately coming from but from the people of this country, whether they had money on deposit in the banks or not?

And how do you think it's right that people who have no say, influence or control in how banks are run or the decisions they take, should be held responsible when they crash and/or burn? (I'm not unaware that this is exactly what's happened, it's just that, unlike yourself wrt depositors, I don't think that this should have happened at all!)

I do agree that there shouldn't have been a taxpayer bailout; and most especially that the the bondholders should have been burned all the way, regardless of what Trichet or Geithner threatened - and that fault is firmly on the shoulders of Brian Lenihan and Michael Noonan, (and Brian Cowan, Enda Kenny, Eamon Gilmore & Pat Rabbitte) IMO.

But, again, the failure there isn't on the on the people whose money was in the banks; it was on the bank officials chasing the never-ending profits. It was on Patrick Neary and the regulator's office, that allowed itself to be 'captured' whole and then, not alone didn't do its job, but applied a patina of 'there's no real risk' respectability, which exacerbated the whole problem far beyond what should ever have been able to happen.

It was on the developers and their acolytes who bought into the whole nonsense of an ever-expanding housing bubble and subsequent soft-landing; and never thought to consider or cared what might happen when things went wrong

And, lastly but most certainly not least, it's on successive Irish Governments who facilitated this cosy and incestuous environment between the banks, the developers, the regulator and the Government - an environment that still very much exists - so that they and their Golden Circle cronies have been protected at everyone else's expense - most currently visible in the treasonous travesty of a con-job that is NAMA.

I think I understand where you seem to be coming from with this, but I just think that it's not viable and would be unworkable, as well as being somewhat unfair on people who have no way of ensuring how their money is managed beyond a certain point - except for maybe the one per-centers who would have the sort of cosy relationships with higher-level bank officials needed to exert influence. Tbh, if you're looking for the right people to punish and have their punishment be an actual deterrent, then those bank officials are ALWAYS the ones to go after - they're the responsible ones; and to paraphrase Matt Taibbi wrt to Goldman Sachs: all you'd need is to put one of those guys into a **** you in the *** prison for six months, just once - and it would never happen again! But that would and will never happen here; we don't punish white-collar crime in this country; and when it comes to that type of malfeasance and criminality, our legal system is constructed to protect these people at everyone else's expense IMO.

Also, I don't think that the amount of money on deposit in the Irish banks - or indeed any of the others involved - was that high a proportion of the overall debts accrued; most of it was FIAT created debt, or re-packaged financial products in the case of the British and US banks, was it not? (Although, I'm open to correction on this one, if I'm wrong?)


To get back on-topic anyway, is there anyone with any further insight into the mis-sold AIB Pinnacle Card insurance?

Any and all info to be gratefully received, thanks!

Terpsichorean Master

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

So called them today on their "dedicated customer helpline" to see what the story is..

Unfortunately though the staff answering the calls can't answer the obvious question - "how much?" - and can only escalate it to an "assessment team", nor can they answer the other questions..

- why the deadline for return of applications? What happens after that date? Do you lose your chance for the free money??
- why are customers being asked to apply for money they are apparently entitled to?
- why would I sign something waiving any further rights/claims without having the details first? Is that not the whole problem originally.. that customers were signing things without the full facts

So now I'm waiting on a callback tomorrow.. Will update the thread then

So what happened?

Did they call you back?

RandomAccess

Hi All,
any update on this?
perhaps you have all submitted the refund requests.

I've just received this letter as it went to an old address because I left AIB some time back.
My letter is dated 30-09-2015 so it seems it was issued after many of yours and my deadline is the 4th of November.

I'm really not impressed with how this letter is worded and the strong arm style it conveys.
I was out of the country when this news story broke so I heard nothing about it until today when I opened the letter!

If I had the choice between getting the money back vs foregoing it so they get a larger fine thats donated to a reputable charity then I'd do that.

_Kaiser_

I'm still waiting on feedback. Because the original card was one I replaced with a different one from them a few years back, they seem to be having issues with getting the records.

Chased them a few times over the last couple of weeks but I think an escalation is in order today

RandomAccess

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I'm still waiting on feedback. Because the original card was one I replaced with a different one from them a few years back, they seem to be having issues with getting the records.

Chased them a few times over the last couple of weeks but I think an escalation is in order today

Maybe try twitter, it usually works for me with other companies. I need to decide what to do anyway.

Tigerandahalf

I didn't bother applying before the cut off date.
I was hoping to get more feedback and info here.
Today I got a final reminder letter stating I need to sign on the dotted line and return by Nov 6th if I want a refund.
I am tempted now to just send it back.

Funnyonion79

Hi I remember paying this for years and cancelled it back in 2011. I don't bank with AIB any more and have moved address so I never received any letter about this.

I rang the Card Services number today and explained my situation. The girl checked their list of people due a refund and I wasn't on their list. She told me if I could find an old statement showing I'd paid Pinnacle insurance, they could check it out for me. An old credit card statement from 2012 didn't mention Pinnacle but it did have part of my old credit card number on it and I managed to remember the full thing, so I rang them back.

They looked me up on a different system and found that I am indeed eligible for this refund and will send me out the letter. I was told I get refunded the €16 from 2006 up until the year I cancelled it - plus a small amount of interest/compensation.

Is it worth pursuing this further and trying to get more or should I just accept what I'm being given? How would we even go about getting more compensation etc??

Bluetonic

Anyone make a decision on this?

RandomAccess

Bluetonic wrote: »

Anyone make a decision on this?

I removed the section from the letter pertaining to waiving my rights with scissors, photocopied it then signed it and posted it.

The way I see it I'm not obliged to waive my rights but they are obliged to refund my money.

Terpsichorean Master

As I'd detailed above previously, I had initially received one of these letters with a compliance date of Oct 1st; but due to some pressing issues which arose, I'd forgotten about it.

I received another letter a few weeks ago that I only got around to reading the other day, and it's a "final reminder", which states that the new compliance date is/was Nov. 6th (yesterday) and that "if [they] do not receive a response from [me] before the 6th of November 2015, [they] will assume that do no require [them] to take any action".

So, they're effectively telling me that the clock has run out and it's too late; which (while acknowledging that it's my own fault that this time has passed without my resolving the situation; but, as I said, pressing matters) I find to be pretty objectionable considering that THEY'RE the ones who are liable and in the wrong!



I had actually called them a few weeks after the initial letter and before the final reminder, to get further information and had found out that they'd sent out approx 120,000 letters, so a lot of people overcharged/misinformed.

Also the woman I spoke to informed me that the settlement would be comprised of a "refund of my premium", some "proportionate interest"; and a "goodwill gesture" amount - none of which could be specified. Which I found rather ironic and more than a little disingenuous, considering that I'm dealing with a bank and I don't believe - not for a moment - that they couldn't access any of those figures immediately, if necessary!

The lady also told me that there was no set rate on the "compensatory interest", that it would be calculated depending on what it would have cost me over the time-frame of the misapplication of the insurance; which as well as seeming odd for a financial institution - whose very raison d’être is based on variant applications of that exact process, amongst others - means that it will be different for everyone, but also very conveniently useful for them, in that it allows them to not have to indicate any specifics for any of the people at the other side of the table, as it were.

She told me that the deadlines were in an effort to facilitate easier administration and processing of the settlements; and that they were sent out in batches.

When I asked her why are customers being asked to apply for money that they're apparently entitled to, she said that the Central Bank (CB) had ordered the refund and that, if you can actually believe this, that "it had to be opt-in, as the bank couldn't authorise the refund to people, because some people wouldn't want it; as they're happy with their policies"; which seems hardly credible IMO, but it does mean that anyone who doesn't engage for any reason can be excluded, which will then, wouldn't you know, reduce AIB's liability.

I also asked why would I want to sign something waiving any further rights/claims without having the details first, when that was the whole problem in the first instance; and she told me that because it's voluntary and that CB had ordered it to be opt-in, that that's all the info that will be given up-front (although there is supposed to be a confirmation letter with a breakdown of what comes back, but who knows how specific that will be - and, at that point, you've already waived your right to redress anyway, so too late if you're unsatisfied).

She said that the procedure is dictated to them by the CB, although the assessors are actually from AIB themselves (surprise, surprise) and that - again, how very convenient for AIB - the CB DON'T have to approve interest rates or goodwill gestures in settlements such as this!


So, in the great Irish tradition of non/self-regulation; AIB are effectively able to set their own rates of "compensatory interest" and decide for themselves how much they should have to pay as a "goodwill gesture".

And, as if that wasn't enough of a slap in the face, that because the CB have issued the initial dictate of this refund/compensation needing to happen in the first place, there will/can be NO FURTHER REDRESS once you engage in this process; which, if you ask me, is the most likely reason that this has been constructed as such in the first place!



Does anyone in this country ever learn and/or will we ever get sick and tired enough of these people being allowed to use this utterly unfit-for-purpose so-called regulatory system to favour those who engage in dishonesty, malfeasance or fraud at the expense of everyone else to insist something is done or actually do something about it ourselves?

And how much longer are we going to allow these people to act as such with blatant impunity, while the country is on its knees due to their avarice, arrogance and criminality?

I, for one, have had just about enough of the smug pomposity and contemptuous disdain with which these institutions and the people who staff them at the upper levels treat the rest of us; and their seemingly unending ability to escape any real censure, consequence or lasting, effective condemnation for their reprehensible actions and behaviour -and all the more so with their recent policies and decisions and how they're (mis)treating their customers, e.g. BOI with their current dictates wrt the in-branch lodging of money.

No wonder younger people just keep emigrating (aside, obviously, from the many other varied factors that influence such a decision) in droves; why would they ever want to spend their lives (over)paying for the lifestyles and mistakes of these institutions and the moneyed elite who run them - and, of course, the political elite who facilitate and protect them???

When it's so clearly and blindingly obvious to anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of what is, was and continues to be happening; that none of this is ever going to change as long as the rest of the us just keep accepting it!

Terpsichorean Master

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I didn't bother applying before the cut off date.
I was hoping to get more feedback and info here.
Today I got a final reminder letter stating I need to sign on the dotted line and return by Nov 6th if I want a refund.
I am tempted now to just send it back.

Did you send it back already?

And what, if anything, happened?

Terpsichorean Master

RandomAccess wrote: »

Hi All,
any update on this?
perhaps you have all submitted the refund requests.

I've just received this letter as it went to an old address because I left AIB some time back.
My letter is dated 30-09-2015 so it seems it was issued after many of yours and my deadline is the 4th of November.

I'm really not impressed with how this letter is worded and the strong arm style it conveys.
I was out of the country when this news story broke so I heard nothing about it until today when I opened the letter!

If I had the choice between getting the money back vs foregoing it so they get a larger fine thats donated to a reputable charity then I'd do that.

Me too, I couldn't agree more. I think the need for the banks here to learn the larger lesson and being made properly aware of their social responsibility by having to pay a properly serious fine/settlement - something well in excess of what the cost/profit is or has been, far outweighs the need for most of us to receive a couple of hundred euros.

Although, I do accept that not everyone can afford that or will feel the same, the negatively reinforcing effect of this playing out as is - i.e. everyone just accepting what the banks' are offering and accepting that we have to do it on their terms only - will be more costly to us all in the long term IMO!

Terpsichorean Master

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I'm still waiting on feedback. Because the original card was one I replaced with a different one from them a few years back, they seem to be having issues with getting the records.

Chased them a few times over the last couple of weeks but I think an escalation is in order today

Did you escalate/hear anything back? And have you sent back in the form?

Am quite curious, as you were on the same initial schedule/batch as I was!

Terpsichorean Master

RandomAccess wrote: »

I removed the section from the letter pertaining to waiving my rights with scissors, photocopied it then signed it and posted it.

The way I see it I'm not obliged to waive my rights but they are obliged to refund my money.

Can you do that? Will they still honour it do you think?

Also wondering do you know if there's any legal basis for doing this, or is it just something you thought of doing yourself?

It seems like a very good approach if it would be effective, as, from what I can gather, their whole approach is/has been take the refund now and waive all your rights to further redress or get nothing later; which I find to be very objectionable considering their liability etc., to say the least!

_Kaiser_

Sorry.. meant to update this...

After escalating on them again I finally got speaking to someone on the project team who was in complete agreement that it shouldn't have taken so long to come back with the info I requested and has in turn passed it on to their complaints department (who have sent me a letter this week promising follow-up although I'm not holding my breath).

In my case it turns out this is all for the sake of about €30-50 quid so I filled in the form in the end and sent it back. I've wasted over a month on it now. My protest will be by switching banks this month instead.

Tigerandahalf

Terpsichorean Master wrote: »

Did you send it back already?

And what, if anything, happened?

I sent mine back. Wait and see now. I signed the form.

Terpsichorean Master

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Sorry.. meant to update this...

After escalating on them again I finally got speaking to someone on the project team who was in complete agreement that it shouldn't have taken so long to come back with the info I requested and has in turn passed it on to their complaints department (who have sent me a letter this week promising follow-up although I'm not holding my breath).

In my case it turns out this is all for the sake of about €30-50 quid so I filled in the form in the end and sent it back. I've wasted over a month on it now. My protest will be by switching banks this month instead.

Oh right, seems like that what everyone has had to do; looks like they've gotten their way and are having it completely on their own terms, as people are just sending back the forms for want of a viable alternative.

But, as you say, you can just take your custom elsewhere and that's probably the best alternative response. Still, seeing as BOI are involved in this also, your options will be somewhat limited.
Are you gonna tell them why you're closing the account?


Btw, did you send it back before November 6th/whatever the date on your letter was?

Just curious, as I've missed my date.

RandomAccess

Terpsichorean Master wrote: »

Just curious, as I've missed my date.

As far as I'm concerned the date is bull**** to get people to wilt under pressure and kowtow, signing their ridiculous form.

They are treating us as debtors! Thats a fact! They consider us to be a liability to which they have some financial exposure. So they want to shut us up and push us over as inexpensively as possible.