Endowment Misselling Complaints Deadline

dunstonh

markbrennan wrote: »

The FS firm DID contract to review these endowment polices in that they advised me that they would review the policies regularly and contact me with appropriate advice; I accepted this offer ( I certainly didn't decline it) so there is an element of a contract via an offer made and accepted; they never contacted me again ( except to try to sell me life insurance once or twice) about the endowments.

In which case, present a copy of your contact and state how much you paid them to provide that servicing and you may have a case for paying for something you didnt get.

However, I suspect you have no contract. Servicing contracts were not common 15 years ago. Most firms of that era were transactional and follow up contacts were ad-hoc and not contractually agreed and not paid for by the individual.

kingstreet

Are you sure?

Is it possible the adviser was talking about the insurer reviewing the plan to see if it was performing in line with the target growth rate?

holly_hobby

markbrennan wrote: »

The FS firm DID contract to review these endowment polices in that they advised me that they would review the policies regularly and contact me with appropriate advice; I accepted this offer ( I certainly didn't decline it) so there is an element of a contract via an offer made and accepted; they never contacted me again ( except to try to sell me life insurance once or twice) about the endowments.

Hi Mark

Quick question ....

Were you aware from outset that the target sum wasn't guaranteed ?

If not, when did you become aware that future returns at maturity were not gted (regardless of whether policy EMV;s indicated it to be on target or not).

Holly

wobblyprop

We made a complaint in 2000, it was about an endowment mortgage signed up at (and sold by!) Halifax Building Society in conjunction with Standard Life way back in 1980's, Halifax stated that they were not responsible as they were just agents for Standard Life, so they sent the details to Standard Life, who refused us, then when we tried to claim again when the !!!! hit the fan years later around 2008 we were told by Standard Life we were only allowed to make one claim, which we had done so and was refused, this despite being aware that claims identical to ours were being paid out, leaves a sour taste as we were penalised for claiming too early and before Banks etc were being forced to pay out by Govt, it makes me so angry whenever I read all the documents from back then, which I have just done,,,:(

holly_hobby

wobblyprop wrote: »

We made a complaint in 2000, it was about an endowment mortgage signed up at (and sold by!) Halifax Building Society in conjunction with Standard Life way back in 1980's, Halifax stated that they were not responsible as they were just agents for Standard Life, so they sent the details to Standard Life, who refused us

Halifax were appointed reps for Standard Life, whom when you submitted your complaint on suitabiity it was rejected.

wobblyprop wrote: »

then when we tried to claim again when the !!!! hit the fan years later around 2008 we were told by Standard Life we were only allowed to make one claim, which we had done so and was refused, this despite being aware that claims identical to ours were being paid out

Its not a claim, but a complaint you made - to which Standard Life basically stated that you had already complained in 2000 and been rejected - therefore unless you were bringing a different complaint re the sale, there was no basis for they to once again review the matter.

wobblyprop wrote: »

, leaves a sour taste as we were penalised for claiming too early and before Banks etc were being forced to pay out by Govt, it makes me so angry whenever I read all the documents from back then, which I have just done,,,:(

You weren't penalised for claiming (complaining) too early - the complaint would have been rejected (if not execution only)based on proven suitability.

Additionally the gov didn't force anyone to "pay out" as such. A justified complaint can only be on the grounds of unsuitabilty - it was either mis-sold or it wasn't. Additionally compensation can not be awarded for loss of expectation (poor performance) - so failing to meet target isn't in isolation a basis of mis-sale, whereas the suitability of the policy and its investment nature to the clients risk profile and expectations would be.

So don't be too hard on yourself - you had already complained in 2000, to which Standard Life rejected your complaint (I assume from their review of the POS docs, that the sale was deemed suitable in respect of your risk profile and you were aware of the non-gted nature of the target sum). If you were unhappy with the basis of the decision and response, you could and should have referred this within 6 mths of the rejection to the Financial Ombudsman Svc (FOS), for their independent review and adjudication in the matter.

Hope this helps

Holly

dunstonh

and before Banks etc were being forced to pay out by Govt

The banks were not forced to pay out by the Govt. Indeed, the Govt never got involved.

we tried to claim again when the !!!! hit the fan years later around 2008

The endowment issue was pretty much in its last phase by 2008. Most endowments were timebarred by 2008.

If anything, it actually got harder to complain as time went on. Not easier. Things that succeeded in the early days and became abused by consumers making complaints (ie. claims company lies) actually led to firms being more thorough in their investigations and making stronger arguments in their defence to the FOS. Plus, later systems had better access to old documents compared to earlier ones.

this despite being aware that claims identical to ours were being paid out,

It is unlikely you are aware of the complaints outcome from other complaints made against the same agent that sold you yours.

Alexjohnson_2

I think you have been mis-sold any endownment claim and you haven't quite understood what it means or how to go about reclaiming it - then you should seek professional advice . I've read up on this quite alot and I've heard EMCAS are experts in the field - worth checking them out I've heard.

dunstonh

Alexjohnson wrote: »

I think you have been mis-sold any endownment claim and you haven't quite understood what it means or how to go about reclaiming it - then you should seek professional advice . I've read up on this quite alot and I've heard EMCAS are experts in the field - worth checking them out I've heard.

EMACS have an awful reputation. I have seen several of their complaint templates and they were identical listing reasons. No better than the templates downloaded from the internet. They were held up at a compliance meeting a few years back as an example of the rubbish complaints methods used by the worst CMCs.

This forum is full of negative posts on EMACs.

Also, they are not able to give professional advice as they are not authorised by the FCA. If they are giving advice, then they are doing it unlawfully.

I'm sorry, but your post smells like SPAM.