Cedar Holdings PPI Claim
PPI Claim Form
Have you ever had PPI with Cedar Holdings?
If you answer "No" to any of the below questions, there's a very good chance Cedar Holdings mis-sold you PPI:
Cedar Holdings should not have added PPI to your agreement without your permission.
Cedar Holdings should have given you the unpressurised option of having PPI.
PPI would not have been needed from Cedar Holdings if you had pre-existing PPI cover elsewhere.
Cedar Holdings should have explained the cost of PPI to you at the point of sale.
If over 50% of your PPI premiums were paid in commission to Cedar Holdings and this was not explained to you, the "Plevin" ruling means you were mis-sold.
Again, Cedar Holdings should have given you the option of having PPI or not.
Your right to cancel PPI within the cooling off period should have been explained to you by Cedar Holdings.
To start your Cedar Holdings PPI claim, follow our simple 4 step guide above.
My Claim Solved have had great success in reclaiming PPI for customers against Cedar Holdings and so far we have reclaimed over £42m* for our clients in PPI mis-selling.
If you were mis-sold PPI by Cedar Holdings, and the claim is successful, you would be entitled to a full refund of PPI premiums you paid to Cedar Holdings, a full refund of interest charged and compensation interest at 8% per annum on the above sums.
Don't Delay! If you would like to start your PPI Claim against Cedar Holdings, complete the form at the top of this page.
* PPI refunds obtained through our claims service, amount is prior to our fees plus VAT and any income tax.
Many customers may have been mis-sold PPI (Payment Protection Insurance) by Cedar Holdings, PPI may have been attached to a customer's policy by Cedar Holdings, in some cases without their knowledge. Cedar Holdings may have refused a credit application if PPI was refused by the customer.
Cedar Holdings PPI wasn't all bad, it was intended to protect borrowers' from being unable to make repayments if they were unable to work due to illness or injury. The problem was how PPI was mis-sold by Cedar Holdings.
There are many examples of Cedar Holdings mis-selling PPI, some customers were not even made aware by Cedar Holdings that PPI was added to their policy, and if the customer was made aware that PPI had been attached, they were not advised by Cedar Holdings that it was optional.
A new PPI mis-selling factor called "Plevin", which means if over 50% of the PPI premiums you paid were set out as commission to Cedar Holdings, and this was not disclosed to you at the point of sale, then you would be due compensation from Cedar Holdings.