Over 50s Life Insurance Plans Guide Discussion

245678

Comments

  • Louise_F
    Louise_F Posts: 7 Forumite
    edited 12 May 2015 at 5:25PM
    Phoenix Life - Court Results
    The Phoenix Life Ltd Saga - on going from January 2013 to May 1st 2015


    As a result of Mum signing up for a Senior Life policy in 1998, (her details were introduced to an insurance company called Cornhill by B&Q Senior Club Members (over 65 years). She never received any full policy information from anyone after signing, which would have given her the opportunity at the time to have a 15 day cooling off period after looking at all the details. She believed the policy payments would stop once she reached the target amount she had ticked on her application - there was nothing to tell her other wise. She was clear it as not a savings plan and no interest would be earned, and also that the amount was payable on death to her estate. She also understood she could not cancel the policy or she would not receive any payments back. Due to her very limited sight in her left eye only she was unable to read her bank statements and she lived alone and independently until aged 88 years. The monthly premiums were now being paid to Phoenix life who took over her policy (in a bulk transfer in 2007) The fact that payments were still being taken by Phoenix life came to light when Mum moved into her daughter Sheila's and it was calculated that the target figure of £1,208 had been reached along time ago. The oldest sister Pauline, then phoned Phoenix Life and tried to get an explanation and full policy details in January 2013. In all Phoenix were asked 4 times for the full policy details and they were never supplied, one page print outs and copies of the actual application form were supplied on 4 occasions.! The matter was then referred to a Complaints specialist at Phoenix Life who replied quoting a free phone number on the "Key features", again this was not supplied with the letter. We were also told in writing at one point that power of attorney would be required to release more than basic information, despite the fact that Mum herself spoken on the phone requesting that her daughter could act on her behalf, as with two hearing aids it was very difficult to deal with matters on the phone, and with extremely limited sight all post had to be read out to her. Having exhausted the complaints procedure the next step is the Ombudsman, this took from February until November 2014 to go through the system.


    Phoenix Life then supplied Policy information to the Ombudsman that had never been seen by Mum or any of her family, the Ombudsman made a decision based on the flawed information and in his written decision kept referring to the policy details; in fact this was like adding insult to injury, it was saying that Mum had either lost the policy information or had not understood it - either she was a silly old fool or a liar. The Ombudsman's decision was not accepted and the decision to go to the Small Claims Court was now the only way forward ; (or accept being called a fool or a liar, and the slur on your character that is inferred as well as the original complaint being completely over looked) to get to the bottom of the matter and get Phoenix to answer the matter in Court in front of a Judge. To put the Ombudsman system into perspective, you can go onto the website were they are obliged to print all the results ; last year 2014 from January to June, The Ombudsman found in favour of the consumer in only 19% of cases against Phoenix life. I can tell you from this experience that it is a system open to abuse and manipulation; and therefore flawed. Mum decided to have her day in Court.
    Fortunately due to Mum receiving Pension Credits she did not have to pay any court fees which would have been £300 at todays costs. It did take, and had already taken a massive amount of time, letter writing and photocopying and perseverance.


    Phoenix Life did not provide the Legal address which is in Birmingham and consequently all the Court paper work was initially sent to the only known address in Scotland and then returned, wasting another full three weeks in time.


    In Court
    On 1st May 2015 at Tameside Small Claims Court. Mum had to get a disabled taxi to Court as she is no longer able to be transferred from her wheel chair to a normal car. I had written to the Judge and asked to be a Mc Kenzie Friend and also for "Power of Audience" as Mum was now 91, with two hearing aids, partially sighted and had never been to court in her life. In Court were Mum, myself, the sister who cares for her, the youngest sister and gran daughter. Mum did speak briefly to the Judge confirming that I should speak for her. she also told him she had been brought up to be honest and that she took the policy out because she thought a great deal of B&Q, ( the introducers) they seemed to be helpful to older people by taking older people on to work and she had a discount from their club membership. She also told the court that she had struggle to bring up her children and had never had much money and so this £1000, "overpayment" to Phoenix was a great deal of money for her. I was allowed to speak, and also question the solicitor appearing for Phoenix Life. I pointed out that I had already enclosed (as evidence)a copy of a life policy and relating paid up certificate that was 76 years old that had been in my Mothers paper work - if she could keep something intact for 76 years was it likely she had lost policy information that was just 16 years old? The solicitor did under pressure, agree that it was possible that a policy was never sent, mistakes might have been made, and the opportunity to cancel within the cooling off period would then have been denied. He answered that Phoenix Life had no legal obligation to inform a policy holder when they took ownership of the policy. The Limitations Act meant it was out of time to bring a complaint but I asked the Judge to look under the Latent Damage Act of 1986, where more time may be allowed if there are special reasons. The Judge was very experienced and was very nice to my mum making her feel included, he allowed me more or less free rein to speak and air the matter, at the end he said he'd give the last word to me, Ms Frank Junior. He mentioned all the main points in his summing up.
    The Judges summing up and decision
    He mentioned that the Consumer Protection offered now is better for such policies but that he must apply the law as it was in 1998 when the policy was taken out. The limitation period allows 6 years for a complaint to be made in Court. He agreed that Phoenix Life had been slow and procrastinated in dealing with the complaint and that the Ombudsman procedure does takes a long time and that "they take the least line of resistance". He could only apply the law and not punish for poor administration or slowness, he also said the law takes no consideration of fairness. He said he believed that Mum had never received any full policy details. Looking at the matter under the Latent Damage Act, the Judge stated that the total time period would be 15 years and time ran out on 27th September 2013 to the day; exactly on this day. He explained there is a right to appeal but he said the defendants would be very likely to win. (so don't do it)


    Of course without all of the time wasting by Phoenix Life it may have been possible to get to court earlier and meet the dead line, there would still no guarantee of a win, as Judge likes to see that everything has been done to resolve the matter before going to court; ie Complaints Procedure with the company and then potentially Ombudsman. If you did not go through the whole procedure it could also be held against you in court.

    My thoughts and conclusions
    Well of course the law is an !!!, and does not deal in fairness. Thankfully the consumer is better protected today but that does not help any one (and there will be some) people in a similar or same position as my mum. (These policies targeted vulnerable older people who were/are more trusting as a generation, they traded on the name of B&Q giving discounts to their over 65 year old customers) The Ombudsman is a very poor procedure, the published results show in black and white fact that your chances of having your complaint upheld is very small indeed - the system is open to manipulation meaning the Ombudsman's result may not reflect the truth and leave you feeling worse about the situation than you did when you started! (Essentially branded a liar or a fool) Going to Court, well, the Judge will only look at the Legal Facts - nothing more. It can cost you money for fees, take even more time. You will need the tenacity of ten men and the whole experience will leave you exhausted and empty and not a single step forward towards a satisfactory conclusion. Phoenix life are the absolute masters at procrastination, but I still don't feel it is entirely a victory for them. It has cost them money to send a solicitor to court and by publishing this story it perpetuates their very poor public image - In court with a 91 year old lady quite deaf and nearly blind! In a similar situation. I do not believe you will get any money back that you may regard as overpayments unless you are well within the 15 year time constraint of the Latent Damage Act 1986, and you will have to argue very hard for it. Advice - Go for a company that comes recommended - make sure you et the full policy and read the small print - don't agree - cancel it within the cooling off period.
  • Louise_F
    Louise_F Posts: 7 Forumite
    edited 13 May 2015 at 9:45AM
    Carmel - please see my latest information re Phoenix Life in Court posted today 4th may 2015 - with the hindsight of all we have been through; these policies were sold targeting the old and vulnerable without any advice being offered or consideration to their financial position in later life. Morally it is wrong,
    Fight, don't cancel and loose everything.
    Best Wishes Louise
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 116,043
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    He mentioned that the Consumer Protection offered now is better for such policies but that he must apply the law as it was in 1998 when the policy was taken out. The limitation period allows 6 years for a complaint to be made in Court. He agreed that Phoenix Life had been slow and procrastinated in dealing with the complaint and that the Ombudsman procedure does takes a long time and that "they take the least line of resistance".

    The judge was wrong. The FOS is slightly more consumer biased and takes into account, law, rules and fairness. They dont go for the line of least resistance.
    The Ombudsman is a very poor procedure, the published results show in black and white fact that your chances of having your complaint upheld is very small indeed

    It depends on the reasons for complaint. Life assurance has low levels of complaint and its hard to be mis-sold, so the stats are low for that reason.
    the system is open to manipulation meaning the Ombudsman's result may not reflect the truth and leave you feeling worse about the situation than you did when you started!

    What truth? There are four truths. What you say happened, what the other party say happened, what actually happened and what the evidence suggests happened.
    Going to Court, well, the Judge will only look at the Legal Facts - nothing more.

    Which is why you are less likely to succeed in court than you are with the FOS.
    It has cost them money to send a solicitor to court and by publishing this story it perpetuates their very poor public image

    As a closed book insurer, it doesnt really affect them.
    these policies were sold targeting the old and vulnerable without any advice being offered or consideration to their financial position in later life. Morally it is wrong,

    If you dont use an adviser, you dont get advice. As already mentioned on this thread, advisers are not fans of these plans and treat them as last resort. If you buy without advice, the requirements are much lower and the person is responsible for their own research. I do agree that the way these are marketed had been bad.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • Is it legitimate to take out these plans if you have been diagnosed with a terminal illness? I've read the ts&cs, and the MSE guide that says they can be lucrative if you play the odds (and live past the minimum qualifying period of 12 - 24 months), but it just seems a bit too good to be true, and not 'in good faith'.
  • Louise_F
    Louise_F Posts: 7 Forumite
    edited 12 May 2015 at 5:19PM
    In reply to Dunstonh 0n 4th may at 2.52 - Thank you for your comments, very interesting, but I stand by everything I say. The Ombudsman is a very poor system - A PROVEN FACT - 19% in favour of the consumer against Phoenix Life in the first 6 months of last year proves that! The facts were that the Ombudsman made a decision based on policy information that had never ever been received by the policy holder! but WAS sent on to the Ombudsman. So the system IS open to manipulation and although I do not agree with everything the Judge said, I wonder why you think you have the right to say the Judge was wrong (I mean you were not there were you to hear everything were you?) when he said "the Ombudsman takes the least line of resistance"; that is putting it mildly and is exactly what happened in the case I go into detail about, and all of the correspondence produced in court confirmed that. Your four truths? well what we said happened, happened and was backed up by copious correspondence - evidence, plus four family witnesses in court prepared to swear to the truth. ... A Judge is a Judge for a very good reason, ... and they can read between the lines too. They can usually workout who is telling the truth. I don't agree that Phoenix Life will not be affected by having to defend themselves in Court, I have potentially opened the flood gates for many elderly people to do the same, or threaten the same. There will be hundreds of elderly policy holders, (this was a senior policy targeting the over 65's, my Mum was already 74 when she signed up via a B&Q Flyer in store) in a very similar position, some may not even realise it - so go and dig out your old Mum or Dads or Uncles policies and check - locked into payments at 85 with rising living and care costs? Phoenix will not want to pay to defend themselves and send in a solicitor, it all costs money.Bad publicity will always hurt in the end, because consumers do have a choice. (check out the Review website where there are currently 88 reviews for Phoenix Life with an average of one star)
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 116,043
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    The Ombudsman is a very poor system - A PROVEN FACT - 19% in favour of the consumer against Phoenix Life in the first 6 months of last year proves that!

    The complaints uphold rate proves nothing other than most complaints referred to it about Phoenix are not valid. It doesnt make the ombudsman a poor system. The courts found against you as well remember.
    The facts were that the Ombudsman made a decision based on policy information that had never ever been received by the policy holder!

    That cannot be proven.
    , I wonder why you think you have the right to say the Judge was wrong (I mean you were not there were you to hear everything were you?)
    We were not there but your comments about what the judge said are what we have to go on and if he said that about the ombudsman then he is wrong.
    A Judge is a Judge for a very good reason, ... and they can read between the lines too.

    Yes. And they know witnesses can have poor memory recollection or tell lies. Which is why evidence is most important.
    I don't agree that Phoenix Life will not be affected by having to defend themselves in Court, I have potentially opened the flood gates for many elderly people to do the same, or threaten the same, and at the very least get their monthly premiums stopped.

    They have no reputational issues as they are closed for new business. You lost the case. Had you won it, then maybe that would be different.
    Bad publicity will always hurt in the end, because consumers do have a choice. (check out the Review website where there are currently 88 reviews for Phoenix Life with an average of one star)
    If they were open for business then they may be concerned about that. However, reviews of obsolete or out-of-date products on a closed book are never likely to be favourable.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 116,043
    Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    MY STATS ON THE FOS ARE FROM THEIR WEB SITE - THEY HAVE TO PUBLISH - THEY ARE NOT MIS READ

    Your interpretation of them is wrong. The statistic is correct.
    ANY ONE CAN CHECK THEM OUT AND 19% in favour of a consumer in any ones eyes but yours is very poor indeed!

    There you go. Your interpretation of a statistic is flawed.
    You need to be removed from this site entirely if you think its fun to wind people up, insult them, call them liars,

    I cannot see any posts that have any such content. No allegations or insults have been made by me. You on the other hand.....
    I posted on here to HELP other people - warn them - not have this ridiculous discussion with you - read back over what you have written and see how ridiculous and petty you are

    I suggest you follow your own advice.
    You cannot just post things on the internet as facts when they are not and expect others to accept them as facts. That is why there is discussion. You should try it some time. It makes contributing to discussion boards much more interesting.
    you are no more than a "wind up merchant"

    To be honest, I am beginning to think that I may be victim to a wind up. This is starting to be very surreal.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • Very useful and it has made me think twice as I was tempted to take out such a policy - not so sure now. What should I do, though, in order to prevent my children having to pay for a future funeral? Are there other, better, options?
  • Quentin
    Quentin Posts: 40,405 Forumite
    Pre pay it now. (Though if you don't it will ultimately be paid from your estate, not by your children)
  • Louise_F
    Louise_F Posts: 7 Forumite
    David Perry, yes check out some prepaid funeral plans that will actually hold the value of the cost of everything at the time - inflation proof. My Mum has put any extra now into an Isa; but has in fact decided to leave her remains to science. It is a radical idea and will not suit all, my Mum signed up some time ago with Manchester Universities' Science Department and more recently I updated everything for her and it is even in her will. The advantages are, It doesn't cost anything at all, and you will be helping Medical Science. The disadvantages are, you will not have a funeral as such, as nothing is given back to the family for burial, the science department hold a service and scatter the ashes in their remembrance garden - I think this happens so many times a year and all the family can go,) Also you do need to have a backup plan, a plan B, so that when Heaven calls and the Science Department do not have room to take you in at that point in time other arrangements can be made very quickly. So you should have some money put away for this as a back up plan. Currently in the North West a simple funeral may cost around £3,700 - the cost has gone up very dramatically in the last 10 years or so. Please discuss it with your family and let them know what ever you decide to do, they should know of your last wishes - you know you can talk about it once - get it all written down and everyone knows what to do when the time comes and its dealt with and put to bed so to speak. I think most universities will have science departments who look for donors = oh the other point to make is if you donate your body on death you cannot also be an organ donor at the same time - they take you intact soon after the time of death collected by their own firm of Funeral Directors - (which they pay for) ... I hope I have given you some food for thought in making a decision. Best Wishes Louise F
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards