Case Studies

PPI Success in Irish Court

We had further success in our pursuit of mis-sold PPI policies at the High Court in Dublin last week. Our sister office McHale Muldoon, which is based in Dublin city centre, successfully appealed a decision that a PPI policy had not been mis-sold when the lender had failed to disclose the commission that they received under the policy.

Our client had entered into three linked credit agreements with the lender, which had PPI policies attached to them. The PPI policies were underwritten by the insurer.  The lender and the insurer were separate entities and had a commission arrangement in place, although this was not disclosed to our client. Without this information being clear, our client was not alerted to the fact that any potential commission arrangements could exist between the lender and the insurer. The lender admitted that they failed to outline the relationship to our client and were therefore in breach of Regulation 19(1)(d) of the European Communities (Insurance Mediation) Regulations 2005 which states that a consumer must be told of the nature of the relationship between the insurance intermediary and the underwriter. However, the lender stated that their failure to disclose the relationship to our client was “accidental” which was not accepted by the Court. Our client maintained throughout the trial that had they been made aware of the relationship and also the fact that the lender was to receive a commission from the sale of the policy, then they not have agreed to take out and the policy and would have shopped around for an alternative since the commission element would clearly not represent value for money.  The lender maintained throughout the trial that the non-disclosure of the commission was not unfair to our client.  However, the Court found in our client’s favour, confirming that the non-disclosure of the commission was misleading. The Court also found that failure to disclose the relationship between the lender and the underwriter was “capable of amounting to a misleading commercial practice” particularly so when combined with the non-disclosure of the commission.

It is worth noting that the Court in Dublin made reference to our involvement in mis-sold PPI cases in the UK that we have taken to the Supreme Court, and also the case of Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd which successfully determined that failure to disclose commission payable under a PPI policy gave rise to an unfair relationship between the lender and consumer and therefore the consumer should be refunded for the PPI premiums that they had paid.  Further commentary on that case can be found here.

This victory at the High Court in Dublin represents another success for consumers who have been mis-sold products by the banks. 

If you believe that you have been mis-sold products by your bank in the UK or in Ireland then please get it touch with us on 0161 928 3848 for a free consultation.