Report Endowment Misselling Compensation SUCCESSES

dunstonh

We referred our mis-selling to the Ombudsman in August 2006. In August 2007 an adjudicator upheld our complaint. Unfortunately the Firm requested an Ombudsman decision. Again in 2008 another Adjudicator upheld our case and again it was referred to the Ombudsman and after answering numerous questions it still with the Ombudsman. Has anyone else experienced this, and is it likely that the Ombudsman will dis-regard his adjudicators and rule against us.

You should have started your own thread really as your questions have nothing to do with this topic. I will answer but if you want more detail, please ask in your own thread as this isnt really suited to holding discussions.

The ombudsman doesnt overturn many but is does sometimes. Usually a firm will only request it to go before an ombudsman if it feels the adjudicator has made a bad decision. IFAs tend to have more success in overturning adjudicator decisions than a life company or tied agency firm. Often because the IFA is higher qualified and more knowledgeable than the adjudicator. However, you are not going to know until its looked at.

It could actually work in your interests if the case remains upheld as values have fallen in the last 18 months.

Just received a letter from FOS asking if my husband and I are experiencing exceptional financail hardship or are in serious ill-health, whats that all about?

It should say why on the letter. They do tend to prioritise those that are suffering medically or have been put in a position of priority debts (unpaid council tax, mortgage arrears etc). If in doubt, ask them.

helebelway

Thanks for this - my partner had a call yesterday from a company quoting they could do this for a 40% cut of any money that they successfully recovered - be glad to have the forms as my partner was sold his when he had massive negative equity last time around and no dependents at the time

magpiecottage

BugBear wrote: »

There are several circumstances in which the timebar can be overturned:
1. The endowment was sold to more than 6 months before it was required
2. The endowment was never attached to a mortgage even though it was set up for that purpose
3. The endowment was sold to single person who had no requirement for life assurance attached to the endowment policy
4. When you were originally advised to take out the endowment policy, the adviser told you to get rid of an existing policy because the new policy would be much better

The main thing that you need to focus on here is that time bar doesn't start running until you have knowledge of the wrong which occured, namely in this case (for example) if number 4 happened to you, you wouldn't know that were entitled to redress until you were told.... You have 3 years from that day to complain.

Actually if you have had a letter from your product provider saying you have until a particular date to complain and you miss it, the Financial Ombudsman Service will normally accept a firms time bar.

It is only normally waived in exceptional circumstances. Illness, or bereavement might be accepted but you would probably need provide evidence.

dreamylittledream

magpiecottage wrote: »

Actually if you have had a letter from your product provider saying you have until a particular date to complain and you miss it, the Financial Ombudsman Service will normally accept a firms time bar.

It is only normally waived in exceptional circumstances. Illness, or bereavement might be accepted but you would probably need provide evidence.

Timebar only applies to the risk element of a complaint.

The point outlined above do not form part of the timebar rules and complaints about these aspects can not currently be timebarred.

However if upheld redress will be limited to these specific elements of the complaint and not any underlying loss made by taking an endowment mortgage instead of a repayment one at outset.

The FOS often incorrectly send out letters saying a claim has been correctly timebarred in the first instance - doesn't means this is correct or it will not be overturned when actually put in front of an adjudicator.

magpiecottage

Sorry to disagree dreamylittledream but I have seen adjudicators accept that a timebar applies full stop if a timebar date in a red letter has passed.

pwllbwdr

CU endowment taken out in 1996, for £77k, now Aviva of course.

I didn't complain yonks ago because at several strategic points I have had letters from NU saying that with the promise, mine would still be in line to pay off. That changed drastically over the last year or so, so I finally got around to looking into it. We were sold the endowment by a company which no longer exists, but is on the FCSC list of defaulters. I got Aviva to send me their original file, which contained various letters from the adviser and this gave me enough info to jog my memory and fill in the form. I was able to remember sufficient detail from the meeting I had with the adviser to make a strong case for mis-selling, and I have just received a cheque for nearly £7k. From making first contact with Aviva/NU about this to applying to FCSC and finally getting the cheque has taken about six months.

Now I'm having a look at the figures to see if I want to keep the endowment running (bearing in mind that it has CI cover which is expensive these days, and bearing in mind the mortgage promise).

dreamylittledream

magpiecottage wrote: »

Sorry to disagree dreamylittledream but I have seen adjudicators accept that a timebar applies full stop if a timebar date in a red letter has passed.

Adjudicators can and frequently do make all sorts of perverse calls - doesn't mean they are right - show me a Final Decision that upholds a timebar on a churn, life cover, or a forward sale based on a red letter and I'll pay attention (and also question who changed DISP whilst I wasn't looking).

The DISP rules on timebar are solely related to risk - they can't be used for issues where a red letter would not reasonably mean the customer was aware there was cause for complaint.

Or to put it another way - why would a letter making you aware that there was a potential shortfall on your endowment also make you aware that the product was unsuitable because you didn't require life cover, or indeed the endowment? It wouldn't which is why the standard timebar rules can not be applied - if you had reason to realise earlier that the product was unsuitable for this reason and you chose not to complain within a reasonable time period then this would be a different matter but this would not be a 'timebar' in the usual sense - and would be tricky to prove for another matter.

Lots of companies (Friends Provident, Barclays and Resolution for three) were forced to reopen and subsequently paid redress on numerous cases a little while ago when it was shown following FSA audit that they'd incorrectly timebarred endowment complaints that were not solely based on risk.

Standard RU89 redress however should not strictly be applied to such cases unless the company chooses to do so however, as the risk part can be timebarred. That said most paid the full compensation that would have been due if the risk component had been upheld also as in many cases this could reduce the amount paid...

baronshouse

Hi Just a quick question
I was sold our endowment in 1997 - it is not surprisingly inderperforming, we did recieve the letters telling us to "act now" a few years ago but because we wern't using the endowment to support our mortgage anymore and more like a savings fund we didn't act - we did at the time discuss cashing in the policy with our bank manager but were advised on a number of occasions not to do this due to the critical illness benefit attached. I have just recieved my yearly statement and the policy continues to underperform and infact i have worked out that it is worth £2000 less than what we have actually paid into the policy. We are planning now to cash it in but want to know if i still have any grounds to make a complaint for compensation or have i completely missed the boat???

PaulDucksbury

Provider : Hill Samuel (became Abbey Life)
Sum : about £6000

Claim was easy as i'd kept salesmans original missleading projections (he even drew a graph of what we'd get, with the curve going right up the page - silly salesman)

dunstonh

we did at the time discuss cashing in the policy with our bank manager but were advised on a number of occasions not to do this due to the critical illness benefit attached.

Probably more likely advised that as tied agents are not allowed to recommend cancellation/surrender of plans. You were basically asking the wrong person.

we are planning now to cash it in but want to know if i still have any grounds to make a complaint for compensation or have i completely missed the boat???

Have you been time barred? i.e. when did the warnings tell you that you had to complain by?

I have just recieved my yearly statement and the policy continues to underperform and infact i have worked out that it is worth £2000 less than what we have actually paid into the policy.

That doesnt mean its underperforming.