Act now on mis-sold endowments: new article

defender_of_the_weak

The only way to challenge time barring is though the courts and although vinnos case showed that it can be done and won this did not set a legal precedent. We see from endowment cases and many other forms of complaint that any attempt to take matters to court meets the full force of these companies legal departments and threats of recovery of costs running into many thousands of pounds. Faced with this kind of pressure most people give up and resign themselves to their fate.

I have argued the matter of time barring with FOS on any number of occassions and even when it has been incorrectly applied, they have rejected the case (as mention in the Mail on Sunday this weekend). FOS in their turn have neither the spine nor brains to deal with this matter properly and use staff to make judgements who have no qualifications in financial services sales and products.

happyjo34

Thank you for the information, I have never made a complaint as I believed that as it was pre 1988 it was out of range. The policy was sold to me by an Estate Agent who was tied to Halifax/Standard Life. As I was working abroad at the time so, therefore, didn't get MIRAS or other tax relief. I won't bother filling in the Solar forms if it will not get any compensation.

defender_of_the_weak

Have standard life confirmed that the adviser was an independent financial adviser at the time of the sale? It is the advisers status, coupled with the date thats important.

Dunston can you please pm me the contact details for solar accounting, something does not strike true here. Nobody pays staff to take on complaints that will fall at the first hurdle.

happyjo34

Thank you, I will write to Standard Life today to find out.

happyjo34

The details for Solar are Solar Accountants, Strathblane House, Ashfield Road, Cheadle SK8 1BB, telephone 08700629212 https://www.solaraccountants.co.uk I checked their logos and they are members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants but weren't on the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce membership listing which is available to the public

HAVEFAITH

Hi, We took out our mortgage in 1988. The endo-policy was massively unperforming (-17k) and after writing to complain was offered 1k and then ignored after our refusal letter. We then send 2 separate Recorded Delivery requests for a reply. Still nothing. So today we phoned them and was told that the 1k offer was the only offer and we now go via the Financial Ombudsman ... any tips on what we should do next please?

dunstonh

any tips on what we should do next please?

It isnt a auction. A redress payment of £1000 suggests that either the surrender penalty of the endowment isnt that much are the endowment is doing much better than you think.

If you dont like the offer, then you can take it to the FOS who will check the company has used the standard redress calculation (which most do now) and then tell you to take it or leave it. Of course, 3 months down the road, the company will probably do a recalculation and with an improving stockmarket that redress could be lowered to 50p.

The payment is not compensation. It is redress. At the time the calculation was made, based on the surrender value of the endowment, you were £1000 worse off. (if the surrender penalty is more than £1000 then you are actually better off).

defender_of_the_weak

At 25% plus vat they will sign up anybody on the slimmest chance of possible success.

Never pay more than 15% including VAT with no up front or administration fee.

Wavefaith and dunston the system is an auction if you deal with a broker. Some do not follow the rules and make 'offers' or let the customer sweat on getting an ombudsman ruling in 3 years time

mayb_2

I have to agree with you 100% defenderofthe weak re the FOS and FSA. Their attitude is often insulting to any one with a gram of intelligence. They contradict themselves and ignore proven facts with no apology because basically they are in it to win it on whatever level it takes. I have personal and proven experience of the levels the FSA will go to to protect the financial services industry - including deliberatly rewriting history and misrepresenting the truth - in the full knowledge that you cannot afford to do anything about it however much proof you have - plus they carefully stretch the process out so you will be lucky to make the three year limit on bringing a legal case anyway.

At the end of the day protecting the financial services industry from public loss of confidence is part of the FSA's remit - this by default then extends to the Ombudsman. At best the 'redress' system was designed to limit the extent of losses to the worst ofenders of the misselling debacle - not to give the best 'redress' to those who had lost out. The very fact that they only pay out when there has been proven misselling, but then insist on calling it redress and not compensation speaks for itself. Lots of people with fat shortfalls on their mortgages at the end of term & nothing done about it would have been a political nightmare afterall.

My mortgage was shortfalling by £25000 and I received about £16,500 in 'redress'. This does not put me back in the position I would have been in if I had actually paid off £25,000 does it. I was not aware of living off the fat of the land because of all of those 'savings' I was supposedly making on my mortgage repayments - don't forget I was also paying the endowment policy as well. Many of us had low start endowment policies which saved you nothing on the repayments - never had a hope in hell of paying off the mortgage and didn't save anything on the repayments either. The only reason we took out one of these was that it could be fixed for two years and at least you knew it would not go up. What they didn't tell you was that at the end of the two years it wouldn't go down with everyone elses either. So I do get a bit fed up of hearing about all the 'savings' we were making at the time.

If my mortgage was shortfalling by £17000 and someone offered my £1,000 I think I would be pretty angry - I would also very much doubt that it was a fair settlement. After all this is £16000 less than you should have paid off the mortgage at this point. However, many times you say it dunstonh, I and many others are not convinced we are any better off than we think MIRAS or no MIRAS.

Any chance Martin will challenge the FSA and the FOS regarding the time bar do you think? I am sure there would be plenty of signatures on a petition if we could start one.

dunstonh

If my mortgage was shortfalling by £17000 and someone offered my £1,000 I think I would be pretty angry - I would also very much doubt that it was a fair settlement. After all this is £16000 less than you should have paid off the mortgage at this point. However, many times you say it dunstonh, I and many others are not convinced we are any better off than we think MIRAS or no MIRAS.

Its your choice not to believe that despite you having lower monthly payments than a repayment mortgage, that it was not cheaper.

You also ignore the surrender value of the endowment which does need to be taken into account otherwise it becomes a freebie.

If someone is at the point of calculation showing a possible shortfall on maturity of £17,000 but is actually only £1000 worse off at this point in time then £1000 is what they are due. If they switch to repayment mortgage at this point, surrender the endowment and take the £1000 and pay both into the mortgage then they will be in the position they would have been had they gone repayment mortgage from the start. And that is what their complaint was based on and that is the outcome that satisfies that.

My mortgage was shortfalling by £25000 and I received about £16,500 in 'redress'. This does not put me back in the position I would have been in if I had actually paid off £25,000 does it.

So, that payment put you back in the position you would have been had you had a repayment mortgage. You are no worse off or better off.

The system worked in this case as you complained, you won your arguement and you got your redress payment.

Lots of people with fat shortfalls on their mortgages at the end of term & nothing done about it would have been a political nightmare afterall.

Lots of people getting redress payments are going to end up in a surplus position on maturity. That would be a politcial nightmore as well if the state was making the payments.