How to go about making a PPI claim

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

We just found a great resource that helps people make ppi claims. People take out ppi insurance in case they have an accident or get sick. People normally take out ppi with mortgages and loans and other financial products. The issue at stake here is that a lof of these plans were incorrectly sold.

Should you be one of those people who took out payment protection you may wish to check if you could reclaim the premiums. This particular firm handles ppi reclaims and does so successfully. We would like you to reclaim as much as possible. Take a look at their eligibility criteria to see if you qualify to make a claim. They charge no upfront fees so there is nothing to lose if your claim is unsuccessful.

Having done some research on this issue, we found that people are claiming back thousands of pounds in compensation. A claims lawyer should have the experience to handle your claim effectively. A claims company will draft a solid complaint on your behalf. This enables you to leave everything in their hands.

If you instruct them to handle your claim let us know how you get on. Their online application form will guide you on whether they can help you with a complaint. A great deal of people are getting compensation payouts right now and you could be one of them.

Tags: ppi claim, ppi claims
Posted in Banking and Investment Law | No Comments »

Credit Card Fraud: Who’s Legally Responsible?

Sunday, December 27th, 2009

Every year, credit card fraud costs the banking, retail, and service industries billions of dollars. In the United States, it is estimated that on average, 7 cents per $100 in transactions is fraudulent. In other countries, that amount is reportedly even higher.

Who Pays For It?
In the United States, federal law dictates that a credit card holder cannot be held responsible for more than $50, regardless of how much is charged. If unauthorized charges occur after you report your card lost or stolen, you are not responsible for any amount.

Although credit card companies can technically hold you liable for the first $50 in disputed charges, they rarely do. Nowadays most banks use “$0 fraud liability” as a marketing strategy. The American Express Platinum card and Centurion black card were some of the first to offer this as a benefit, but now all American Express cards do the same, as well as most other major banks.

Therefore, the financial institutions that issue and underwrite credit cards are almost entirely responsible for the cost of fraud.

Is Identification Required For Purchase?
Although many merchants ask for photo identification when processing a credit card purchase, they are not required to do so. In fact, Visa, MasterCard, American Express, and Discover actually have policies which discourage asking for ID. Instead, they state all that’s needed is the cardholder’s signature. Many favor this practice; claiming it makes transactions easier and faster. Meanwhile, others wish that photo IDs were required, in order to discourage unauthorized credit card usage.

Tags: american express platinum card, credit card fraud
Posted in Banking and Investment Law, Credit Cards | Comments Off

Credit Cards Move Away From Forced Arbitration

Sunday, December 27th, 2009

Most consumers are unaware of the fact that they’ve given up the right to sue their credit card company. Instead, nearly every credit card agreement imposes forced arbitration in the event a dispute arises.

The financial institutions claim doing so cut costs, but consumer advocacy groups argue that it is unfair to customers. “Customers come to our message board all the time talking about how they are going to sue, but they’re left shell-shocked when they discover the truth” says Jennifer Holter, editor at Credit Card Forum (a message board for credit card reviews).

In what is being hailed as a major win for consumers, a number of banks have dropped their mandatory arbitration clauses during the past few months; Bank of America, Chase, and Capitol One. Although they largely claim the moves are voluntary, in reality it is probably from the pressure of a pending class action lawsuit filed by Philadelphia-based Berger & Montague. The suit alleges that credit card companies unlawfully colluded on arbitration terms. There are still four defendants listed in the lawsuit who have not yet settled; The National Arbitration Forum, Discover Financial Services, Citibank, and HSBC.

It’s important to note the credit card issuers whom have dropped their arbitration clauses may re-impose them in future. Reportedly, Capital One and Bank of America have only agreed to do so for three-and-a-half-years. None of the defendants who have settled admit liability or wrongdoing.

Tags: arbitration, banking law, credit card forum, Credit Cards
Posted in Banking and Investment Law, Credit Cards | Comments Off

U.S. Government: A Strong Economy Requires Effective Security Measures

Tuesday, December 8th, 2009

Sometimes a severe catastrophe has to happen before authorities and leaders realize that something has to change. The U.S. government now realizes safeguarding the nation cannot be taken for granted - it is a pre-requisite for a strong economy.

After 9/11 stiffer and more daring banking laws and regulations have been imposed. Most are designed to monitor transactions and alert the government of financial transactions which may be related to, or intended for, terroristic activities.

One such act, The Money Laundering Act, came in to prominence only after the September 11 terrorist attack. This banking Law requires financial institutions to identify and report transactions of suspicious nature to the financial intelligence unit.

Perspectives Vary by Country

The financial institutions protect the privacy of their customers but they are also required to file a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR). A SAR alerts a US agency called Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of possible terrorist funding or other unlawfully related financial transaction.

Some other countries impose a different approach; in the US a bank deposit of $10,000 will require a bank to file a Currency Transaction Report (CTR). Some European nations will file a CTR for deposits of EUR 15,000 and above. A bank in the US can file a SAR if they suspect possible money laundering but in Switzerland they can only file a SAR if it was already proven.

A Suspicious Bank Account

A SAR is only required if an account is suspected to fund any unlawful activity. A CTR on the other hand is required for all bank transactions involving $10,000 and above. Even if a regular bank customer withdraws $10,000, a CTR has to be filed for this. However, if a customer deposits several hundred thousand dollars, then withdraws and deposits thousands of dollars regularly, a SAR has to be filed.

This banking law may turn off customers from using bank services - which, in turn, may lead to fewer bank deposits. Banks will then have less money to fund loans.

Nevertheless, these regulations can prevent catastrophic events from happening again. Consumer confidence has dwindled and the stock market suffered from the 9/11 attack. No one with rational and normal thinking would want that to happen again.

Let us not wait for something that big and devastating to happen before taking the steps necessary to protect ourselves. Changes have to be made for the greater good. Security is truly an investment for a strong and stable economy.

Tags: bank regulations, banking law, national security
Posted in Banking and Investment Law | No Comments »