Anyone had success claiming missold Endownment from Barclays?

buel

Hi,
has anyone here had any success in claiming a missold endownment policy from Barclays?
My parents never received the letters informing them that their endownment policy wasn't doing well until, apparently, their third letter. As soon as my mum read this she wrote to Barclays to complain that they were missold the endownment policy, they argued that she had complained too late and she should have complained when she received their first letter, my mum argued that she lives in a very rural area where sometome the post gets lost or delayed (which is true), Barclays insisted that they sent the letters so my mum had to complain to the Financial Ombudsman where she got a very insensitive adjudicator who dealts with the case (Adjudicators deal with cases before a Ombudsman) and said that the rule is, basically, if Barclays showed proof that they sent the letters then that is good enough so he wouldn't even look at the case of the policy being missold being as my mum hadn't issued her complaint in the given time threshold (from Barclays' apparent 'first' letter)

Now, i have at the ready 3 neighbours who are willing to sign a statement saying that they share the exact same post code as my parents and that they have in the past received post for my parents and have, at some point, also had post missing. I am going to help my parents, if i can, but i must admit that having done a bit of research on the FOS i am a bit aprehensive being as they are known to side with the banks...and i have read that they are funded by the banks...although i dont know if this is true!
Please can anyone tell me have they had any success claiming a missold endownment against Barclays?
And is my parents' claim a non-starter?
many thanks in advance- Buel

dunstonh

Please can anyone tell me have they had any success claiming a missold endownment against Barclays?

This has nothing to do with Barclays. Its the FSA approved time bar that is the problem. Barclays are just following the guidelines set.

but i must admit that having done a bit of research on the FOS i am a bit aprehensive being as they are known to side with the banks

There is absolutely no evidence that they side with the banks. The FOS reputation is that they are generally slightly consumer biased as they disregard certain documents that a court of law would consider.

And is my parents' claim a non-starter?

yes.

I doubt anyone is going to believe your parents didnt get all their post. You get the first warning of high risk of shortfall, then another one or two over the next years and finally you get a warning of the time bar date. One envelope may go missing but all of them over the three year period? Most providers send the detail with the statements. So, the fact your mum knows from there is a shortfall would indicate that they got the statements and therefore got the warnings.

buel

Thank you for that, it makes such a change to hear/read some sound clear advice! My mother never mentioned to the ombudsman about the death of her brother during this time period, do you think it is relevant? Ie-exceptional circumstances!

dunstonh

My mother never mentioned to the ombudsman about the death of her brother during this time period, do you think it is relevant?

It would do if say she was in the 6 month period following a complaint (if you dont follow up the initial rejection within 6 months you get time barred there). However, the FOS are unlikely to accept that as a reason why it took over 3 years for them to raise a complaint.

Do you know the date that the time bar came into effect or the date that the clock started ticking on the time bar (the first notification of the high risk of shortfall)? Basically, she would have to convince the FOS that she was unable to make a complaint for the whole of that period for whatever reason. That could be anything from 3 years to 9 years. That's pretty difficult to do and very few succeed.

For reference and in relation to your "has any one else...." comment, over three quarters of all endowments are now time barred from complaint. Generally, the only way to get the timebar waived is if the provider hasnt applied it correctly. There were some cases years ago like that where some tried using 2001 warnings and they got overturned. However, they went on to use 2003 and 2004 figures instead and they got time barred in 2006/7. So, the ability to overturn on a technicality is quite hard now.

Also, just in case my post appeared harshly worded, it wasnt intended that way. I was just using plain speak and how it would be looked at by a third party.

buel

On the contrary, your answer/s are perfect and to the point, perfect one could say! Thank you so much for taking the time to reply! I will post later with the relevant answers to the points/questions you raised!

Just out of interest, i always wanted to be an financial advisor when i was younger but, due to lack of brains and application, never did! May i ask what route you took? As in university/college?

buel

Hi,
My parents' have had their endownment miselling claim turned down by the Adjudicator due to the fact that they are time barred. My mother explained that quite often we dont receive the the correct post for our rural address in the hills of Wales but didn't go into detail, the adjudicator turned down their claim as Barclays 'word' that they sent two letters (one in 2001 and one in 2005) is apparently good enough! Now, i am writing to the adjudicator again, on their behalf, but this time clarifying the following points regarding the postal probl;ems we suffer:

• There are 25 addresses that share our post code
• There are four extremely similar farm names to ours in the vicinity that share our post code, by this i mean that our farm name is 3 words and the other four farms all use at least one word from our address
• I have at least two neighbours willing to make sworn statements that they have regularly received letters meant for my family, as have we received post meant for them.
• Unbelievably(and i swear this is true), even today we have received a letter for a completely different name and address in our village

Do you think there is a possibility that these points may help the adjudicator look at my parents' case?

Ps- how relevant is it that my dad was unemployed through long term sickness when sold the endownment and that the salesman didn't ask by what means my dad would pay off any excess remaining moneys owing on the mortgage and that it was due to mature after my dad had turned 65?

many thanks in advance-Buel

dunstonh

There are 25 addresses that share our post code

Thats not many compared to other areas.

There are four extremely similar farm names to ours in the vicinity that share our post code, by this i mean that our farm name is 3 words and the other four farms all use at least one word from our address

Not uncommon in rural areas. We get it all the time around here. The postman know this.

I have at least two neighbours willing to make sworn statements that they have regularly received letters meant for my family, as have we received post meant for them.

So, they obviously handed the incorrect post over then. Thats good of them.

Do you think there is a possibility that these points may help the adjudicator look at my parents' case?

No. That is clutching at straws. You are asking the adjudicator to believe your parents havent had statements for the last decade, or if they did, they didnt get the ones with the time bar warnings. One may go missing but all of them?

Ps- how relevant is it that my dad was unemployed through long term sickness when sold the endownment and that the salesman didn't ask by what means my dad would pay off any excess remaining moneys owing on the mortgage and that it was due to mature after my dad had turned 65?

None at all. Indeed, it actually supports the use of endowment as endowments are not included in benefits means tests. The age 65 thing isn't that important nowadays due to consumer abuse years ago. As long as its not too many years later its not a problem.

The FOS are fairly strong in supporting the timebar. Typically, they only overrule in cases which are clear cut.