DISP App 3.11 Obligation to write letters to certain rejected complainants

In this section:

1. (1)

   “purported complaint” means an expression of dissatisfaction which would have been a complaint, had it related to an activity which comes under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service;

2. (2)

   “recurring non-disclosure of commission” means any omission of the kind described at DISP App 3.1.1G(3)(b); and

3. (3)

   “non-disclosure of commission” means “failure to disclose commission” as defined at DISP App 3.1.5G(7) or recurring non-disclosure of commission.

DISP App 3.11.2R and DISP App 3.11.3R apply where:

1. (1)

   a complainant has made a complaint to a firm in relation to its sale of a payment protection contract which covered or purported to cover a credit agreement (this includes partial coverage);

2. (2)

   the complaint was rejected by the firm before 29 August 2017 in that the firm did not offer the complainant the redress they would have been offered had the firm concluded that the complainant would not have bought the payment protection contract they bought; and

3. (3)

   any referral of the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service has been concluded and did not result in the firm offering (or being required to pay) the complainant redress on the basis that the complainant would not have bought the payment protection contract they bought.

The firm (or, where applicable, a successor) must as soon as reasonably practicable, and no later than 29 November 2017, send a written communication to the complainant which:

1. (1)

   informs the complainant that, despite having already made a complaint in relation to the sale of a payment protection contract, they can make a further complaint against the CCA lender in relation to a failure to disclose commission;

2. (2)

   makes clear the identity of the CCA lender, where this is known to the seller or can be identified by them following reasonable steps;

3. (3)

   informs the complainant of the 29 August 2019 time limit;

4. (4)

   refers to the availability of relevant further information on the FCA’s website (whose address should be provided) or by contacting the FCA’s PPI contact centre (whose telephone number should be provided); and

5. (5)

   where the firm is also the CCA lender, informs the complainant of its arrangements for handling further complaints about a failure to disclose commission.

The obligation to send a written communication does not apply where, in relation to the relevant payment protection contract the firm, or where appropriate the Financial Ombudsman Service, has previously considered, or indicated to the complainant in writing that it will consider, a complaint on the basis of a failure to disclose profit share and/or commission.

DISP App 3.11.5R and DISP App 3.11.6R apply where, in relation to the sale of a payment protection contract which covers, covered or purported to cover a credit agreement (this includes partial coverage) a complainant has made:

1. (1)

   (in relation to a regular premium payment protection contract) a complaint to the CCA lender that was rejected before 30 January 2019 in that:

   1. (a)

      it was considered under step 2 of DISP Appendix 3 but redress on the basis that an unfair relationship under section 140A of the CCA had arisen was not offered; or

   2. (b)

      it was not considered under step 2 of DISP Appendix 3 because the complaint was treated as a purported complaint that did not come under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service; or

2. (2)

   a purported complaint to the selling firm that would otherwise have fallen to be considered under step 1 of DISP Appendix 3 but was rejected before 30 January 2019 by that firm on the basis that it did not come under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

The firm that rejected the complaint or purported complaint (or, where applicable, its successor) must as soon as reasonably practicable, and no later than 29 April 2019, send a written communication to the complainant which:

1. (1)

   in a case falling within DISP App 3.11.4R(1), informs the complainant they can make a complaint against the CCA lender in relation to recurring non-disclosure of commission;

2. (2)

   in a case falling within DISP App 3.11.4R(2), informs the complainant they can make a complaint against the CCA lender in relation to non-disclosure of commission;

3. (3)

   where the firm is not the CCA lender, makes clear the identity of the CCA lender where this is known or can be identified by the firm by following reasonable steps;

4. (4)

   where the firm is the CCA lender, informs the complainant of its arrangements for handling complaints about non-disclosure of commission;

5. (5)

   informs the complainant of the 29 August 2019 time limit; and

6. (6)

   refers to the availability of relevant further information on the FCA’s website (whose address should be provided) or by contacting the FCA’s PPI contact centre (the telephone number of which should be provided).

The obligation to send a written communication does not apply where:

1. (1)

   the firm is otherwise required to send such a written communication is the CCA lender, and knows that no non-disclosure of commission has occurred during a time which falls within the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service;

2. (2)

   the complainant has already been offered or paid redress in respect of the payment protection contract (either on the basis that the complainant would not have bought the payment protection contract they bought or on the basis that an unfair relationship under section 140A of the CCA had arisen) by 29 April 2019;

3. (3)

   the CCA lender or the Financial Ombudsman Service has indicated to the complainant in writing that it will consider or reconsider the complaint or purported complaint and that consideration is not completed by 29 April 2019; or

4. (4)

   the CCA lender has, when considering or reconsidering a complaint or purported complaint, already considered recurring non-disclosure of commission and not offered redress on the basis that an unfair relationship under section 140A of the CCA had arisen.