Date-stamp loading
Status: In force
Version date: 31 March 2013 - onwards
    Version 1 of 1    

DISP App 3.1.3

Where the firm determines that there was a breach or failing, the firm should consider whether the complainant would have bought the payment protection contract in the absence of that breach or failing. This appendix establishes presumptions for the firm to apply about how the complainant would have acted if there had instead been no breach or failing by the firm. The presumptions are:

(1) for some breaches or failings (see DISP App 3.6.2 E), the firm should presume that the complainant would not have bought the payment protection contract he bought; and

(2) for certain of those breaches or failings (see DISP App 3.7.7 E), where the complainant bought a single premium payment protection contract, the firm may presume that the complainant would have bought a regular premium payment protection contract instead of the payment protection contract he bought.

Comparing proposed amendment...