help with misold endownment-Please help!!!

happybroker

EdInvestor wrote: »

You will probably be best to cash in the endowment, use the money to reduce the mortgage, and increase the monthly mortgage payment by the amount of the (now redundant) endowment premium.You may need also need to increase the mortgage payment above that level and extend the mortgage term.

Be careful before following advice like this, seek financial advice from an expert before cashing anything like an endowment in, it could lose you plenty of money.

Edinvestor, making statements like this is a bit rash, the OP hasn't even stated what kind of Endowment this is and people take the advice posted on these forums quite seriously.

EdInvestor

happybroker wrote: »

Be careful before following advice like this, seek financial advice from an expert before cashing anything like an endowment in, it could lose you plenty of money.

These days it's usually the other way round.Very few endowments are worth keeping.

But the OP can post some info on his policy if he wants a view

Surrender value
Monthly premium
Maturity date
Maturity forecasts
Interest rate payable on mortgage.

neverdespairgirl

treliac wrote: »

There are many of us who believe that deadlines are an arbitrary and unfair measure to prevent claims unless, of course, it can be proven that the claimant had previously been advised that they may have been mis-sold and of their entitlement to make a claim, and had not bothered..

Time barring applies in almost every aspect of civil law, whether or not you've taken advice.

For example, in employment law, it's 3 months. End of. Why are endowments so very different?

treliac

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Time barring applies in almost every aspect of civil law, whether or not you've taken advice.

For example, in employment law, it's 3 months. End of. Why are endowments so very different?

Endowments and similar were mis-sold through the use of dishonest and deceptive practices. The consequences of which are still being paid for today, often decades later, by those affected; and amounting to tens of thousands of pounds or more in interest and capital on mortgages that should have been purchased and paid off by the repayment method.

I can't see the comparison with employment law.

neverdespairgirl

In all areas of law you have time limits - from the time you knew (or should have known, with constructive knowledge) that you had a claim. My point is that in other, often far more serious, areas of law, there are much tighter time limits - 2 weeks in Immigration Law, 3 months in Employment and for judicial review - so I see nothing to complain about, comparatively, in the endowment time limits.

treliac

It feels extremely serious to learn, years after the event, that the type of mortgage purchased is not fit for purpose.

The impact of mis-sold mortgages can have the deepest and lifelong financial consequences.

A time bar seems appropriate if timed from the point of learning you have a claim and I can't think many would argue otherwise. But with endowments et al, some are discovering their predicament and finding they have already been time barred. This does not seem at all reasonable.

I don't see the point in making comparisons with other areas of law. There isn't a logical consistency in time limits, as pointed out in your examples. There are many anomalies in legislation.

dunstonh

It feels extremely serious to learn, years after the event, that the type of mortgage purchased is not fit for purpose.

It is fit for purpose. If sold correctly. Complaints are not about the product but about the way it was sold.

The impact of mis-sold mortgages can have the deepest and lifelong financial consequences.

The average shortfall on maturity is not very big and the lower monthly costs and massive rises in house prices and lower inflation have more than compensated.

A time bar seems appropriate if timed from the point of learning you have a claim

You mean from being told by someone that there is a free pot of money waiting to be claimed from so why not make up some porkies and put a complaint in? Ok, thats extreme but that is one of the reasons why the time bar exists. To stop opportunistic complaints coming in from those that want to see if they hit target or not.

In reality, we are about 6 years now from the first shortfall warning projections. If you were mis-sold and told you couldnt fall short then you have had 6 or so years to put a complaint in. The "didnt know I could complain" excuse is a bit on the thin side now.

All that said, I do feel that you either introduce time bars across the board or not at all. You shouldnt pick and choose what is timebarred or not.

neverdespairgirl

treliac wrote: »

It feels extremely serious to learn, years after the event, that the type of mortgage purchased is not fit for purpose.

Not as serious as the potential consequences of a genuine refugee being sent back in error, though!

treliac

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Not as serious as the potential consequences of a genuine refugee being sent back in error, though!

An odd comparison to make. A situation I would not consider alongside my mis-sold mortgage.

treliac

dunstonh wrote: »

It is fit for purpose. If sold correctly. Complaints are not about the product but about the way it was sold.

If sold correctly, mine wouldn't have been bought as it wasn't fit for purpose. The whole point of complaining.

The average shortfall on maturity is not very big and the lower monthly costs and massive rises in house prices and lower inflation have more than compensated.

That doesn't ring true with our pension mortgage, the true facts of which were never explained at point of sale. And there are more than a few of us who bought these, approximately 150,000 apparently. Also, I believe, there are still those who don't understand their position as red letters, etc don't get sent out for the reasons we have already discussed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1625628.stm

You mean from being told by someone that there is a free pot of money waiting to be claimed from so why not make up some porkies and put a complaint in? Ok, thats extreme but that is one of the reasons why the time bar exists. To stop opportunistic complaints coming in from those that want to see if they hit target or not.

In reality, we are about 6 years now from the first shortfall warning projections. If you were mis-sold and told you couldnt fall short then you have had 6 or so years to put a complaint in. The "didnt know I could complain" excuse is a bit on the thin side now.

I have no time for opportunists. But every sympathy for people who were ripped off by big and wealthy companies.

As I've agreed with you already in this thread, people who have delayed claiming, once they knew they had a case to do so, are victims of their own inactivity, for whatever reason that was.

The important factor is knowing you have a case. As it happens, more and more people are now going to be timed out and so it will be largely academic, it seems. This is unfair though IMO for people, in situations similar to ours, who still don't understand.