Claim for MPPI 10 years premiums refund

marshallka

Dunstonh, this is a copy of their final response in that they state that we would and could benefit from BOTH policies

Dear Mr

Policy Number

Further to my previous letters, I have had the opportunity of
investigating your file and am now in a position to provide you with my
response to your written complaint which was raised on 7 April 2010.
Prior to this date you had made requests for a refund of premiums paid.

Background

On 4 August 2010:eek:(he got that date wrong here) , you commenced mortgage payment protection insurance
through us and arranged this cover yourself via the internet. The risks
insured were accident, sickness and unemployment. The monthly benefit
was £*** with a deferred/wait period of 30 days.

Complaint

You require a refund of premiums paid. You state that prior to your
commencing the above policy you had alternative insurance through your
current employers and so have had duplicate insurance (save for the risk
of redundancy which is not covered within your employer’s scheme).

You complain that there is no reference to the affect of alternative
insurance in our terms and conditions. Furthermore, you say that at no
point prior to your commencing this policy were you advised that
alternative cover would have an effect on the monthly benefit that you
could/may receive in the event of an insured risk occurring and,
therefore, you have been “over-insured”.

Additionally, you say that you would not have arranged stand alone
redundancy cover.

Finally, you state that a representative of Cardiff Pinnacle confirmed
that you were entitled to a refund.

Analysis

I note that you commenced employment with ******* on ****
1999 and took out our Mortgage Payment Protection Insurance (“MPPI”)
with us on August 2004.

***** of ***** Employee Benefits Limited has confirmed that
throughout your association with ****** you have had the constant
benefit of Income Protection Insurance (“IPI”) and continue to do so.
This cover has been provided by Canada Life (August 2004 to 27 July
2007), Legal & General (28 July 2007 to 31 August 2009) and Friends
Provident (1 September 2009 to the present date). You have kindly
provided me with copies of each policy and I have reviewed them.

In brief, these policies cover each member for a percentage of their
earnings in the event that they become unable to work by reason of
illness or injury. The deferred period under each scheme is 26 weeks.
A claim may be paid to the member’s date of retirement. These policies
are income protectors for long term illnesses/sickness.

However, these schemes are not mortgage payment protection insurance
which are designed to protect secured loan repayments and not lost
income which may be applied to all categories of expenses. In view of
this, I do not concur that you had duplicate protection, were
over-insured or are eligible for a refund of all or any premiums. In my
opinion, you could have had the benefit of both policies at the same
time.

I note that you received an e-mail on 26 March 2010 stating that you
“had duplicate cover since 7 September 2009”. However, this statement
was made prior to our receiving copies of your employer policies.
Indeed a request was made in that communication for copies of the
relevant policies. A review of these documents shows that no duplicate
cover existed. However and on hindsight, I accept it would have been
prudent to examine your papers prior to making such a statement. For
this, I apologise.

With regard to your contention that you would not have taken out
protection for redundancy, I can only confirm that your MPPI was taken
out by you over the internet. You would have chosen the risks to be
insured and a schedule of cover would have been sent to you together
with a copy of your terms and conditions.m

Additionally, you would not have been able to proceed with the purchase
of cover without confirming that you had read and understood both the
key facts document and policy terms.

In respect of your terms and conditions, these do not refer to the
affect of alternative or duplicate cover as it is assumed that potential
policy holders are aware of their own personal insurances.

You have referred to page 23 of the ABI’s Best Practice paper as amended
on 14 January 2005. However, this is specific to IPI and so not
relevant to your MPPI.

Conclusion

For the above reasons, I cannot accept your request for a refund of
premiums. However, I acknowledge that you kindly provided us with copy
documents and have been awaiting this final response. For these
reasons, I attach a cheque in the sum of £50.00.

I anticipate that the contents of this letter will be of disappointment
to you but hope that it explains the reasons for my decision which is
based on the information and papers in my possession.

This letter has now exhausted our internal appeals process. I am
enclosing a leaflet explaining the procedure should you wish to pursue
this matter with The Financial ombudsman Service. Please note that in
accordance with the instructions of the enclosed leaflet, the Ombudsman
can only investigate your complaint if you approach them within 6 months
from the date of this letter which forms a final decision on the matter.

Yours sincerely





Rv
Customer Relations Officer"

robbedofmymoney

Marshallka

as per my previous posting,

they are correct in stating that MPPI will pay out along side an income protection policy, however, there is a maximum combined limit you can claim for on these policies, this limit is your nett income you currently recieve. (in normal circumstances your mortgage payments come out of your monthly income)

so if the 2 policies added together exceed what you currently earn you are over insured. and they will reduce the benifit on one of them, (so you will have been paying for something you will never fully get).

i have had to recently re-look at a number of insurance policies and cancel some for the same reasons.

so i now just have my income protection policy and MPPI policy,
together they total just below my nett income. all other ppi has been cancelled. (this is the maximum i will/can get),

obviously i have life and critical illness cover but this is different.

i'm all for being insured, it's sensible, but it needs to be correct, and it doesn't meen insurers can take the micky and charge for policies that we may never see any benifit from.