Williams & Anor v Black Horse Ltd [2011] EW Misc 21 (CC) (7 December 2011)

Williams & Anor v Black Horse Ltd [2011] EW Misc 21 (CC) (7 December 2011)

The Claimants failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Defendant made a positive misrepresentation linking the PPI to the granting of the loan. The Defendant complied with its duties under ICOBS as a tied intermediary by ensuring affordability and providing a Demands and Needs Statement, and was not required to advise on market alternatives or value for money. Any technical breach regarding provision of policy summary documentation was not causative of loss.

Citation
[2011] EW Misc 21 (CC)
Parties
Claimant: Mr Williams; Claimant: Mrs Williams; Defendant: [Defendant Lender]
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Breach of Statutory Duty, Negligence, Payment Protection Insurance (ppi), Insurance Intermediary Duties, ICOBS Compliance
Consumer Protection Insurance Law Financial Regulation Misrepresentation Breach of Statutory Duty Negligence Payment Protection Insurance (ppi) Insurance Intermediary Duties +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Williams

Claimant

Mrs Williams

Claimant

[Defendant Lender]

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant misrepresented the optional nature of the PPI policy to the Claimants
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant breached statutory duties under the Insurance Conduct of Business Rules (ICOBS) as an insurance intermediary
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant was negligent in failing to advise the Claimants about the disadvantages and alternatives to its PPI policy

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimants failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Defendant made a positive misrepresentation linking the PPI to the granting of the loan. The Defendant complied with its duties under ICOBS as a tied intermediary by ensuring affordability and providing a Demands and Needs Statement, and was not required to advise on market alternatives or value for money. Any technical breach regarding provision of policy summary documentation was not causative of loss.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed