Why not make banks foot the bill for claims firms’ fees?

Sorry Jack, but I am getting a bit fed up of the company line of ‘less’ nuisance calls and holding directors to account.

There have been thousands of experiences shared on Which? of how nuisance calls are ruining peoples lives, scams where people are being conned into parting with their hard-earned money.

When PPI has run its course, VW claims and goodness knows what else will rear their ugly heads and we will subjected to new scams. We are never going to get ‘less’ nuisance CMC calls.

When is Which? going to start listening and send nuisance phone callers the same way as nuisance doorstep callers and call for an outright ban?

Jack – You are right that CMCs are a major source of nuisance calls. Alfa has produced a long list of Conversations that refer to nuisance calls and has had a long running campaign to stop them. I was very supportive but it is time for Which? to press for action that will put an end to these calls. For some time I have been suggesting that companies that make nuisance calls should have their telephone service withdrawn for increasing periods until they learn their lesson. Furthermore, I suggest that this happens promptly rather than waiting for hundreds of thousands of nuisance calls.

To the best of my knowledge, Which? has not even pushed for marketing calls to be opt-in rather than opt-out via the TPS.

Apologies for this rather aggressive post, Jack, but if you look back at the many Convos I hope you will see that the current approach in dealing with the problem is not good enough.

In a perfect world CMCs would not exist, but they do. Also in a perfect world financial companies would say sorry here is your money back but they don’t. So in the meantime I suppose we need a sticking plaster.

Some companies already inform customers they are due a refund as I was sent a claim form by one, so they are not all bad.

Stopping CMCs calling us in the first place would be a big step but the powers-that-be are not listening to us.

I see CMC’s as a bit like No Win No Fee “layers” who only take on cases they are virtually sure of winning and then scoop a chunk of the proceeds that, otherwise, might have gone to the injured party. Isn’t legal protection insurance a better solution here – granted they still only allow claims to proceed that are likely to be successful, but for anyone that seems sensible.

Perhaps we could have an insurance that deals with making complaints (that involve a financial reward) instead of commission-based companies? As for the banks paying the CMCs, remember it is not the bank’s money being used, in the end it is ours – whether depositors or borrowers (interest) or shareholders (stock value and dividends – remember these don’t mainly go to capitalists but fund most of our pensions). We’ll pay one way or another. So we need to keep the costs as low as possible.

I agree with what you say Malcolm, but just have a different way of wanting to get rid of CMCs.

Claimants can always go to the Financial Ombudsman which is free and funded by the financial institutions although indirectly we are still paying for it. They seem to uphold a large proportion of PPI claims compared to other complaints so is worth a try when financial companies are not playing ball.

But did claimants instigate going through a CMC, or did they take up offers from unsolicited phone calls.

My bet is the majority will have responded to nuisance callers and that is what needs to be stopped.

A recent CMC nuisance caller wanted to send me forms to put all my accounts down, then they would check them all out for me to see if I was due any refund or compensation as PPI could be hidden anywhere and I wouldn’t know anything about it.

CMCs are out of control and as long as they are able to call us they are going nowhere. How long before they bombard us with VW claims?

I share your view Alfa. I reckon most of the PPI compo claimants got hooked by a nuisance call. Apart from a few mailshots in the early days that has been the most prolific channel for attracting such a claim. In my limited experience most nuisance calls start off with a falsehood so it’s not just a nuisance, it’s a trap.

Most calls start ‘How are you today’ answer ‘ok until you called’.

Just supposing I had been dumb enough to write all my accounts down and send them to this CMC company that was really some kind of scam and then discovered all my accounts empty? I could have lost everything. But people do fall for their tactics and as long as they can call us, phone scams and CMC companies will exist.

John, Should we pay less tax?

The problem i find with all these simplistic polls or votes is they ask a question without background information, and generally seek a populist answer. In my poll, well – where then do you make up the lost tax?

Like “surveys” – and I regard the “30 000 don’t think car manufacturers are fair” put to the select committee – unless you ask people who understand the situation, or give them balanced, honest and fair information on which to base their view, you’ll often get the answer you want.

I hope polls and surveys that can, and are, used to influence public opinion, are carefully and openly constructed to avoid false results.

Surely just make it a legal requirement for banks, e.g. to deal with their PPI properly. Government/Civil Service has enough to do (and is not that competent anyway ). It should legislate and monitor, not get involved in the nitty-gritty. It can’t even distribute EU payments to farmers – a £1billion fine is in the offing.

VOSA seems to do a competent job in handling the many vehicle recalls that are announced. If a company has miss-sold PPI, is it going to be competent at ensuring those affected are refunded? The companies have had the opportunity, in my view.

VOSA no longer exists. It is now DVSA (Driver & Vehicle Standards Agency). Why do they have to continually change the names of organisations we got familiar with? Are these still giving names and addresses to 3rd parties? If so, do you like a private company being able to chase you for a civil parking penalty with the collusion of a government body?

I look at the past history of government attempts to make working databases and keep them secure, and am less than impressed. Less impressed still at the money they fritter away trying to get them to work. And much less impressed at the way most are subcontracted to less-than-good commercial companies who make even more money out of us. So I’d like to see a much better solution.