Endowment Policy can you claim mis-sold PPI?

Duns. has already replied, but I'll make comment to what you've said.

A Whole of Life Policy - is fundamentally and primarily a life assurance policy, albeit with an element of investment built in (be it with profits or unit linked).

The inclusion of CI in your partners policy, suggests to me this is a universal WOL contract and unit linked (which is the savings/investment element). This type of WOL contract, along with standard provision of life cover, also offers additional protection elements - such as Critical Illnes (CI), Permanent Health Ins (PHI) and other accident benefits (this will vary with providers).

Obviously the more additional protection selected, the lower the resulting premium available for investment, with the cost of provision actually met by cancellation of units. WOL policies also generally have a premium review clause (which may be reviewd after the 10th anniversary of the policy).

Essentially the aim of the policy is to cover all the policyholder’s protection needs within 1 policy - whilst providing flexibility for the policyholder to move their primary requirements from protection to investment to suit their needs throughout life ... i.e. in early yrs family protection may be the priority, whilst in later yrs with no dependants, the indvidiual may wish to maximise growth potential, and so will "switch" requirments as reqd.

Having briefly explained WOLs it may make more sense now why your partner was sold and chose to accept one, IF he expressed a need for life cover to cover his C&I mge, with CI cover (generally recommended if affordable), with the addition of the prospect of a savings element, and a policy affording future flexability to provision i.e to take account of any future family he may have, etc.

Even if he just expressed a need for life cover and CI - a combined policy (even if it gave him a longer than reqd term) may have been cheaper than effecting separate ones with the provider (taking into account the avoidance of 2 policies charges, etc). As he has the option to cancel the WOL when his mge ends - but with the advantage that he could continue it, as the WOL does not have a defined term, with cover provided until death, whenever that occurs (subject to premium maintenance of course). So there may well be several reasons why this would not be a mis-sale - including the fact that the policy may have been cheaper than effecting 2 separate life assurance & CI policies, and/or if only a small diff in premiums, the added availalbe benefits of the WOL policy, still qualified it as suitable under best advice regs.

However, IF he did not have a need or want any of the above, or the benefit was mis-represented, and he solely wanted to protect his mge debt on death, then there may be a mis-sale, as a Decreasing Term Assurance would have both suitable for the need with the lowest premium.

You say he has 2 WOLs both for differing amounts, were they both taken out at the same time ?

If so, what was the reason ?

As Duns. states, the Point of Sale (POS) docs, essentially the Reason Why/Suitability letter - should clearly explain the basis of need and recommendation for all policies sold - have a read through and come back with the bones of what was recorded by the adviser - but on the face of it I don't think there is a mis-sale, but will reserve comment until we have a bit more infor from the factfind and advisers discussions.

Hope this helps

Holly

millymoo188 wrote: »

Hi, not sure if i'm in the right place, only joined today and cannot find where to start a posting :cool:

Back in 1997 I took out a mortgage with Cheltenham & Gloucester, which I applied for at my local Lloyds Bank, and I was told quite clearly that I could only have this mortgage if I took out PPI, even though I was fully paid when on sick and in very secure employment. I have been living in spain for the last 7 years (sold the house in 2004 when I moved in with new hubby) and everytime I hear on the radio about reclaiming ppi I think I should really do something about it....but whats the cut off date......even though I KNOW I was mis-sold it.....is it too far back to do anything about ??? thanks :-)

That is the weakest PPI complaint there is. It is an unprovable allegation. Plus, you are making it on the one PPI that is generally regarded as worth having and gets the lowest success rate on complaints and C&G MPPI can only be set up correctly (as monthly premium).

There is no cut off date although lack of evidence and documenation is likely to exist as the mortgage was cleared 9 years ago and data is typically retained for 6 years after.


loan PPi and credit card PPI is where the main PPI issues are.