A Plevin (Susan Plevin against Paragon Finance in 2014) or PPI2 Claim is a claim that does not consider whether the PPI policy was suitable and potentially mis sold, rather instead we examine to see if the lender failed to disclose high-levels of commission payments they earned from PPI premiums, making the relationship unfair.
The consumer credit act regulates consumer credit and consumer hire agreements, it is the law that gives consumers protection on purchases and sets out how credit should be marketed and managed. Section 104a specifically refers to 'unfair relationships between creditors and debtors', this is the basis on which we make the claim. It's called a Plevin claim on the back of a claim that was brought about by Susan Plevin against Paragon Finance in 2014 around the basis that the levels of commissions charged ( 71% ) were completely unfair.
When the matter was considered by the Supreme Court in the leading Judgment, Lord Sumption held that the non-disclosure of commission was a source of unfairness by reason of ‘sufficiently extreme inequality of knowledge and understanding’. He stated that there is a tipping point where commission becomes so excessive that it renders the relationship between the borrower and lender unfair.
From August 2017 the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) ruled that any amount of commission from PPI policies of over 50 per cent was mis-selling, according to the Regulator the average commission was 67%, how ever some banks take over 90% of the entire cost of the PPI premiums as commission. Claims that were submitted against banks and lenders without considering the amount of commission paid or previously rejected could all qualify under the new ruling.
*FSA Consultation paper CP15/39
All figures above show amount calculated after deduction of taxes and fees