Thanks for the replies.
I have contacted Mr Hutcheon (RBS) in order to provide an update on the latest position. I will let you know when he has responded

Thanks.

Worth a try, just got off phone with rbs they said there online forms are generic and any adjustment / interest would be added when payment is made .Was told to wait a bit longer .quizzed them about forms and wording no further forward .

I have finally had a reply from RBS this morning. It seems they are still offsetting against my discharged trust deed of 5 years ago.

‘I am writing further to your email of 23 December 2020. As a member of the PPI Executive Concerns Team I have been asked to look into matters for you.

I am sorry about the difficulties you have had when attempting to find out this information from us regarding your PPI refund.

I have now spoken with our Debt Review Team who have advised that the Bank retain an interest in the PPI refund and this would be offset towards outstanding arrears with the Bank, should the offer be accepted.

Please note, there has recently been a Supreme Court decision in relation to these types of cases (RBS Vs Donnelly) and our Legal Department are currently finalising the Bank’s approach in regards to this. They have advised that they should have an update for me in the New Year, but as soon as I hear back from them I will let you know how/if this impacts your case.

I trust this email has been helpful, but if you have any further queries please let me know.

Hi Debtnomore.

I think this is the same message we've heard previously. The RBS legal team seem to be taking stock of the recent legal developments and working out how/whether this changes the position that the bank is taking.

I received a letter this morning from MINT (RBS) regarding a PPI claim from 2011 - no amount quoted but that I'd 28 days to accept. I called them up and got the amount and filled in the acceptance form anyway. I was discharged (as was my trustee over 6 years ago) and I've had previous PPI paid as my trustee wasn't interested and I got details from them on this. It's not a massive amount but interested to know who this are panning out as it of course mentions if you were in TD they can use the amount offset blah blah. Any one have any other tales if they pay out of hold up because of this court case? Thanks everyone.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrBlue32
[br]Hi, Long time lurker on here and only recently registered.

Like most people under this topic i have been chasing up the RBS with letters going back to 2017 with no such luck and have been following replies on here and the Donnelly case.

On Christmas eve i received letters in response to my PPI claim with the following information

"we previously wrote to you on dec 2017 with an offer in respect of the above mentioned ppi policy. To date we do not appear to have received a response from you to enable us to make payment.

Should you wish for the outstanding offer to be paid, it is a requirement tht you accept the offer and provide us with your account details via the banks online form within 12 weeks from the date of this letter. Failure to respond within this time could result in your offer being withdrawn.

On receipt, we will endeavor to make payment as soon as possible to your nominated account, subject to clearance of any arrears you may have with the bank. Any statutory interest payable will be recalculated upto a maximum of 28 days from the date of the offer letter"

Now the tone of this letter is different from the banks other responses. Every other letter has mentioned the "Donnelly case" and awaiting on the outcome, but not this one.

I have emailed the bank back for clarity on what this actually means as-
The letter dose not confirm the monetary values of the offer
They claim they have not had a response, despite 3 years worth of letters and emails
Statutory interest looks like is only payable to the original date of the offer - surely the offer should be recalculated to date?

Is this the bank backing down as a result of the Donnelly case but still trying to not pay out in full by stating the original claim dates?

Has anyone else received anything similar?

Thanks

---

Yep same here, letter makes no mention of offset but online form does

Emailed RBS today for clarity on their rebranding to NatWest to ask that ongoing claims are still honoured under RBS. I am sure this would be the case, unfortunately as we have seen they will use any legal route to prevent payment!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kayak
[br]Emailed RBS today for clarity on their rebranding to NatWest to ask that ongoing claims are still honoured under RBS. I am sure this would be the case, unfortunately as we have seen they will use any legal route to prevent payment!

---

I thought the rebranding happened in July? There is an article in (another ;)) well known online forum that refers to it happening "on Wednesday", but it's from the day after the change took place.

Therefore,the recent Court of Session case was some time after the rebranding took place.

I don't think I have the strength to re-read the section of the Court judgement which covered the debate around RBS-as-is and RBS-as-was.

However, in very broad terms, Donnelly's side argued that the original loan was taken out with RBS as it used to be, while the court action was being taken by RBS as it is now, and that's a different entity.

RBS successfully argued that it makes no odds what 'the Group' is currently called, or how it's made up, it's the same entity.

(That's a *very* broad summary of that mind-numbing section of the judgement!)

TL;DR - RBS themselves said in court that rebranding and reorganisation of the Group doesn't change anything to do with PPI refunds on old loans.

Thanks Candlewick. I have read the whole report a few times now and it was the as is and as was section that i thought refered to my question. That said, i really dont trust RBS with the dealings i had with them over the years. Reading the judgement, to me its clear they have to pay out. They have set aside many hundreds of ££M for that eventuality. I just cant for the life of me figure out further stalling tactics. Paragraph 111 covers the original litigation outcome that they sought and still stalled when they got the decision.

I just cant see how they can legally go against this latest ruling, basing the pursuers of set off are under the same or similar circumstances as Mrs Donnelly.

Hi Kayak. I can appreciate that you don't have much trust in RBS, and why that is!

Like TDA said a day or so ago, RBS are clearly still assessing the outcome of the Court of Session case, and what that means for what they do next.

I'm interested in their use of the word "finalising" but that might be overly hopeful of me!

I received this further response from RBS after questioning them on likely date for definitive response.

‘The Donnelly decision is what is currently being reviewed by our Legal Team. I’m unfortunately unable to comment until they advise us further as to how the Bank will be taking these cases forward. I understand that they hope to have finalised this in the New Year. My contact in that team advised it is taking a while as the court judgement is 73 pages, but as soon as I hear from them though I will let you know.

In regards to the letters we sent you, these have been sent out to customers where there is an outstanding offer, as we look to close off the PPI project over the coming months.

I understand that the letters advised you would need to accept the offers within 12 weeks, so I have spoken to the team regarding this. They have advised that this would not apply in your instance as you are awaiting the Bank’s guidance from the Legal Team. I have also left notes regarding this on our database.

I trust this information has been helpful, but if you have any further queries please let me know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Debtnomore
[br]I received this further response from RBS after questioning them on likely date for definitive response.

‘The Donnelly decision is what is currently being reviewed by our Legal Team. I’m unfortunately unable to comment until they advise us further as to how the Bank will be taking these cases forward. I understand that they hope to have finalised this in the New Year. My contact in that team advised it is taking a while as the court judgement is 73 pages, but as soon as I hear from them though I will let you know.

In regards to the letters we sent you, these have been sent out to customers where there is an outstanding offer, as we look to close off the PPI project over the coming months.

I understand that the letters advised you would need to accept the offers within 12 weeks, so I have spoken to the team regarding this. They have advised that this would not apply in your instance as you are awaiting the Bank’s guidance from the Legal Team. I have also left notes regarding this on our database.

I trust this information has been helpful, but if you have any further queries please let me know.

---

"As we look to close off the PPI project over the coming months".

I wonder if that's another flicker of light at the end of the tunnel?

Thanks for sharing, Debtnomore

Very interesting, also glad the 12 week letters await the banks decision on the case and are not time bound!Thank you for sharing Debtnomore.

Looking for some advice, i like most of you had my ppi monies fully offset as a result of an old trust deed which both i and my trustee were discharged about 12 years ago.
I received my original offer and signed snd returned under protest due to the offset wording.
I read now that RBS hope to finalise their ppi team shortly, does that mean if the RBS list all appeals everyone who originally signed the offer letter will still be entitled to any ppi monies

Hard to say Mercgaz74 what the legal stance is on this as you have signed accepting set-off. However set-off has been proved wrong, so my opinion , for what its worth, would be you should be due the money back if you can prove you signed under duress. Good luck.