Act now on mis-sold endowments: new article

dunstonh

Don't know if anyone could help but submitted a claim for miss sold policy from 1990 last month to have my claim turned down due to time bar.

The majority of endowments are now timebarred. Most hit their time bar between 2006 and 2008. That is why the endowment issue is generally classed as being over now.

have wrote and asked them to reconsider but if i get turned down is it worth taking it to the FOS.

The FOS need a good reason to overrule the timebar. They are quite hard on this and typically it means you have to show that you were incapacitated or unable to make the complaint for the whole period. You are probably talking around 3-5 years now.

I think it doesn't help that we didn't cash in the other 2 endowments straight away as the new endowment didn't require payments for 5 years.

It doesnt help your complaint also as it shows you had 2 already which would suggest you knew a bit about them. Experience does come into play with investment complaints. However, the timebar is the real issue.

lisajaynec

Thanks everyone, my claim was upheld and i have received an offer of over 20k today.
Lisa

mandymack

Quick question to the learned people on here, look at claiming of mis selling on endowment at the time it was first discussed a few years ago but couldn't find any proof that it had been mis sold. However I have just come across a letter from the IFA which I dealt with at the time in which he states that the percentage of the endowment is very low and in fact I could expect to be able to pay my mortgage off early as a result. Do you think it is worth trying to now claim or have I missed the boat because I didn't claim at the time ?

dunstonh

However I have just come across a letter from the IFA which I dealt with at the time in which he states that the percentage of the endowment is very low and in fact I could expect to be able to pay my mortgage off early as a result.

It depends on the wording is in context and any risk warnings in the report

Do you think it is worth trying to now claim or have I missed the boat because I didn't claim at the time ?

Over 3/4 of endowments are now timebarred. If you are now timebarred then it doesnt matter what you find. Its game over.

Craigybabes

Hi, I have been digging through my paperwork from my endowment policy. I have never before looked into this until now. I took out my policy in 1999 and have found a letter less than 1 year after taking out the plan stating "Based on your plan update, we consider that your plan may not pay out enough. In view of this you may wish to think about taking action" I wasn't aware of this at the time (naivety, ignorance?). Over the years I have remortgaged and have increased the percentage of my mortgage to a repayment. However, I will still fall short in 2024 if i don't increase it again or switch completely to a repayment. The notes from my advisor at the time read "This is the best option for you"
I called L&G today and they say I will have a shortfall of £3,610. My policy surrender value is £10,370 (after 11yrs of £75). It's not much of a shortfall really.
I understand that i may well have missed the deadline, but do you think it's worth pursuing? I know I should have looked at this before

dunstonh

I called L&G today and they say I will have a shortfall of £3,610.

No they didnt. They said you COULD have a shortfall of £3610 (which actually isnt much and could easily translate into a surplus).

I understand that i may well have missed the deadline, but do you think it's worth pursuing? I know I should have looked at this before

A 1999 sale of an endowment should be much better documented than say a 1991 sale. So, statistically, i would say you will have a hard job and that assumes you are not already time barred (which is more likely).

What would be your reasons for complaint?
What evidence do you have to support your complaint?
Did you buy via an IFA, solicitor, accountant or l&G tied agent or direct?

Craigybabes

She said "as of today you have a shortfall of £3,610" So i said "Therefore, my policy lump sum would be £x less this figure" and she said yes.
I understand what you mean though and I'm sure she meant that too.
My reason for a complaint (at the time) should have been it failed to be the right option 10 months into the plan. The only evidence I have is the letter from L&G stating this. I was advised through a Financial Services operator via the Estate Agent.
Thanks for your reply and advice.
I'm now looking at changing the part interest/part capital to 100% repayment and keeping the endowment policy as a savings fund.

dunstonh

My reason for a complaint (at the time) should have been it failed to be the right option 10 months into the plan.

It is not uncommon (indeed it is very common) for the target growth rate to be higher than the example projection rates used on shortfall letters. Some have good reason for doing this whilst other providers did it on purpose so they could set the timebar clock running. i.e. if your endowment had a required target growth rate of 6% to hit target and then the example projections each years used 5% instead, then by default, the plan would show a shortfall. This shortfall would appear even if the plan was achieving 7% a year. Its just the nature of the way the projection system works.

Plus, the projection system assumes staight line growth using the same rate every year. Yet in reality, that isnt how the product works (year one would have been mostly charges and had no chance of hitting target) and it isnt how investment returns work.

So, if that is your only basis for complaint, then its weak as it is easily refuted. Have you got any other reasons?

I was advised through a Financial Services operator via the Estate Agent.

Did they represent L&G or were the an IFA? The FSA register will tell you their status (and if they are still trading - which may have an impact)

Craigybabes

I'm not sure what she was part of. She just worked in th eestate agents. I've just looked at the register and she is on there. Under 'Principals' are Legal & General Assurance Society, Legal & General Unit Trust Managers and Legal & General Portfolio Management Services. Does thi smean anything.
I know I'm clutching at straws but hearing of all the endowment bad news of shortfalls etc mine does have a projected shortfall. I have no other reasons other than that stated. What other reasons would there be?

dunstonh

I'm not sure what she was part of. She just worked in th eestate agents. I've just looked at the register and she is on there. Under 'Principals' are Legal & General Assurance Society, Legal & General Unit Trust Managers and Legal & General Portfolio Management Services. Does thi smean anything.

It means she was a tied sales rep of legal & general. So, L&G have the liability on any complaint you make. Statistically, IFAs has a better track record than tied agents. It means that even if she is no longer around or the estate agent has gone, L&G still have to answer any complaint you make (unless you are timebarred)

I know I'm clutching at straws but hearing of all the endowment bad news of shortfalls etc mine does have a projected shortfall.

Ironically, the events of the last few years could actually be very good news for late endowments like yours. One of the major reasons for failures on endowments was that we went over a decade without any real volatility in the markets and regular contribution plans work better when its volatile. So, in the short term, it may not look great but long term, it can do wonders.

I have no other reasons other than that stated. What other reasons would there be?

There is only really one reason with endowments. Were you made aware it was investment linked or not and were you given a comparison with a repayment mortgage. If yes, then its an easy rejection for them. If no, then you would usually win your complaint. The important thing is that documentation is King. What you claim was said (or what they claim was said) doesnt really make a jot of difference. Documentation trumps verbal claims. So, if they can show their suitability report compares the repayment option and highlights the pros and cons and that you chose endowment then you are going to have nothing to combat that. If they cant show that, then they should uphold the complaint.