Act now on mis-sold endowments: new article

anandp

The second of the two. They have not stated the time-barred principle as a reason for rejection.

It goes into specific answers to the reasons for complaining in my original letter (template from Which, then customised for the further advance).

dunstonh

The provider will often answer questions and discount them or agree with them without it having any impact on the final decision. Whilst the Which template is quite easy to fill in, the providers have seen these templates so many times and many of them have bits that have no impact on the decision.

What is the actual reason for refusal as that is the important thing?

turbobob

anandp wrote: »

Got quite a detailed letter from Britannia on this, rejecting the claim for mis-selling on the further advance. I'm not sure if i agree with the reasons though since they seem to be based on assumptions:

1) You came to us for the further advance for a conservatory, so I see it as your responsibility to ensure you have the means to pay for this.

2) This loan was taken out in 1995 - you have had plenty of time to come to us with this complaint, why was it not done sooner?

The actual letter contains more arguments like the above 2, and the tone also seems quite strongly negative.

Can those with more experience on these boards give me some advice on how to proceed?

What is the complaint here? That Brittania didn't sell you an endowment to cover a further advance?

jellybambam

Hello, I took out a Prudential endowment mid 80s for around 20k but have never converted it to a mortgage. Whilst it may have bought a house then I can probably squeeze a small car out of the proceeds now when it matures in 4 years time

I'm paying the monthly fee to use it as an investment account.

Whilst this has been subject to underperformance alerts, in the last couple of years it has been on track, and in any event I am guaranteed a minimum maturity of 20k even if it does underperform.

Am I am guessing there is no point investigating a mis-sell? I did have a second product which I recall was a life plus assurances type investment which I had to rejig as it was due to mature when I was about 130 years old (I had to up the payments to bring the term down, but I cashed this in early as I needed the capital).

Thanks for any advice.

dunstonh

Am I am guessing there is no point investigating a mis-sell?

On what grounds?

You cannot complain about performance or lack of (although Pru shouldnt be too bad and should have beaten savings accounts. You cannot complain about suitable alternatives as in the 80s these were the only things that the tied salesforces sold.

If it was a mortgage endowment, you could complain that you never had a mortgage and it was the wrong product. But then it may be a savings endowment you may have.

anandp

turbobob wrote: »

What is the complaint here? That Brittania didn't sell you an endowment to cover a further advance?

The actual complaint is that further advance was mis-sold because of the following:

- No checks were made on the affordability of the loan
- The further advance was on an interest-only basis and adviser did not check about a suitable capital repayment vehicle being in place
- The further advance does not finish until after retirement

anandp

dunstonh wrote: »

The provider will often answer questions and discount them or agree with them without it having any impact on the final decision. Whilst the Which template is quite easy to fill in, the providers have seen these templates so many times and many of them have bits that have no impact on the decision.

What is the actual reason for refusal as that is the important thing?

The actual reasons for refusal in the letter are given as follows:

- Salary and income details were provided and assessed along with outgoings to determine ability to repay the loan. Approved on this basis.

- I ticked a box on the application form "to be advised later" on the question about how I intend to pay back the capital on the additional advance. Since 1989 they have had no communication from me regarding this.

- As the main mortgage is supported by a non-Britannia endowment policy, they believe it is fair to conclude that I have had ample opportunity to realise that no similar policy exists for my further advance.

- Original mortgage term is 25 years, due to finish when 69, further advance term will finish at 68 years old. The term for the further advance was amended from 23 years duration to 22 years indicating a discussion taking place where 'you' chose to reduce the term by 1 year. They therefore feel I was aware of the duration at application stage.

- They believe I would have picked up the issue around a suitable payment vehicle not being in place for the further advance at the time of receipt of the mortgage offer and subsequent annual bonus statements from the endowment policy provider.

- If I felt the product was unsuitable for me, they would have expected this to have been raised at the time and not 13 years later.

turbobob

In my personal opinion, I am not surprised they have rejected the complaint.

Affordability was presumably within their criteria otherwise they wouldn't have approved the advance. If you knew you couldn't afford it why take it out? Its not like a conservatory is a necessity.

Term is almost a moot point with an interest only mortgage. Its the term of whats going to be paying it off which is important.

What discussion took place around the issue of how it was to be paid off? The question seems to have been asked as you have indicated that it was to be advised later..

dunstonh

To be honest, it seems like you have picked a template letter and "had a go" with a number of options you hope may work. Their responses do have merit and remember a lot of the decisions where there is no proof one way or the other have to go with the balance of probabilities.

You didnt buy your first endowment through them and no indication you were buying the second one so why should they further question it?

jellybambam

dunstonh wrote: »

On what grounds?

That was my point, I don't believe I have any, it was my choice not to transfer to a mortgage. I just wanted a second opinion to confirm this and that I was not missing something obvious. Thank you