Report Endowment Misselling Compensation SUCCESSES

dunstonh

it turns out that the company that sold me the endowment gave them the address of the property that i was selling and not the 1 that i was buying

Which is normal as at the point of sale, you normally live at the previous address and move into the new property later. The change of address should have followed but clearly didnt.

my question is if i cash in my endowment does this mean that i can't claim compensation.

No. The redress point is either surrender or the last date it was used against a mortgage.

can i do them at the same time or will i have to wait for compensation first ?

You can do it when you like. You dont need to wait.

You sound confident you are going to get redress (its not compensation). Typically, complaint uphelds are around the 35% mark. (some distribution channels are better/worse than that). What is your complaint and what evidence do you have to support your complaint?

mo2411

helpwas sold an endowment with standard life/ buildind sociaty bradford/bingley in1990for£15000,surrenderd 2001 when told of short fall & changed to woolwich just repaid morgage can i still claim or is it to late , if not how do i go about it ..

SPANISHTRAVEL

Hi I have had an endowment since 1994 with Clerical Medical. I applied to the FSA some years ago now (as missold) and received £12,000, which was nice. However not knowing much about what I could do and not do and always hoping that my fund manager might improve I hung onto it. What a mistake! I have just been offered £35,ooo by clerical medical to encash it. I have actually paid in £43,ooo. I might as well have put it under the mattress.
So this is a story of mild success but I would like to know what else I can do. It appears more than negligent but criminal. Their job is to increase our fund!?. Rather amusingly their latest letter pointed out that part of my payment was for life assurance. As the sum I need to pay off the mortgage is near £80,000 its not really a helpful comment. What else can I do?. I have got a form for the ombudsman. However I want to take my money out now. Will this affect a settlement?

dunstonh

I would like to know what else I can do.

nothing.

It appears more than negligent but criminal.

No it doesnt.

Their job is to increase our fund!?

They cant buck the trend if the trend is down.

What else can I do?. I have got a form for the ombudsman. However I want to take my money out now. Will this affect a settlement?

You have had your redress payment of £12k. You dont get a second bit of the cherry. Had you done the correct thing when you were paid the redress, you would not have increased your shortfall. Instead YOU chose to remain invested and accept the risk that goes with that. A risk that hasnt paid off (thanks to credit crunch and global recession).

Any complaint you make will be rejected.

magpiecottage

I agree entirely with DunstonH.

You will have either received an offer in full and final settlement from whoever advised you, or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme - which would mean just that - or you will have had a decision in your favour by an Ombudsman at the Financial Ombudsman Service, which will have been legally binding on you if accepted by you within the time limit he specified.

The purpose of the redress is to ensure that if you used it and the surrender value to reduce the mortgage it would come down the the level it would have been at the time if you had taken a repayment mortgage at outset. You could then convert the mortgage to repayment over the rest of the term.

If you did not do that, it was entirely your decision.

MacBeth_2

Provider: Scottish Provident via Bradford & Bingley
Compensation: £4k

Took out a small endowment in the early 90s (£14k) to add to an existing mortgage - and it was going to pay out just short of £10k. It was fairly obvious that in the circumstances we were in at the time that it wasn't the right product for us.

I got nowhere with the insurance company, I took it to the ombudsman and lost. However, I then took it up with the building society/agents and they agreed and paid out.

MattyA

MacBeth wrote: »

Provider: Scottish Provident via Bradford & Bingley
Compensation: £4k

Took out a small endowment in the early 90s (£14k) to add to an existing mortgage - and it was going to pay out just short of £10k. It was fairly obvious that in the circumstances we were in at the time that it wasn't the right product for us.

I got nowhere with the insurance company, I took it to the ombudsman and lost. However, I then took it up with the building society/agents and they agreed and paid out.

Thanks for reporting your success - it gives me a bit of hope.
I have just been knocked back by both Standard Life and Legal & General who both say that I havnt been disadvantaged - according to their calculations that they dont show/detail.
I fail to see how I cannot have been disadvantaged when:
a) The endowments were not going to do what I was told they would do - IE pay off my mortgage.
b) Included life cover that I did not need due to other cover that I had being more than adequate.
c) My converting from endowment to repayment mortgage and the associated costs and increased mortgage payments.
d) The surrender value of the endowments being less than their value / what I had paid into them.

Seems like a well practised & rather quick fob off to me.

I dont know whether to go straight to the FOS or tackle the actual lender (Halifax & Northern rock)who sold me the endowments with their mortgage first.

If you dont mind me asking were any of your reasons similar to the above?

dunstonh

a) The endowments were not going to do what I was told they would do - IE pay off my mortgage.

Even an endowment that is not on track to hit target can still be better than the position you would have been in had you been on a repayment mortgage at that particular point.

b) Included life cover that I did not need due to other cover that I had being more than adequate.

If you can evidence that you did not need life assurance (not including death in service) then usually you can get that overturned. If you are married and/or have children then you have little hope of that.

c) My converting from endowment to repayment mortgage and the associated costs and increased mortgage payments.

it would do. The lower monthly cost of an endowment mortgage was one of the most common reasons for people doing the endowment mortgage. Switching to repayment basis will cost more. You cant have it both ways.

d) The surrender value of the endowments being less than their value / what I had paid into them.

irrelevant as the redress calculation uses the surrender value and not the current value.

Seems like a well practised & rather quick fob off to me.

Seems like logical reasons. Just a failing to explain why.

I dont know whether to go straight to the FOS or tackle the actual lender (Halifax & Northern rock)who sold me the endowments with their mortgage first.

The insurers have the liability here. Not the lender. The lender will refer you to the insurer. It doesnt matter anyway as you won your complaint. So, even if they did look at it as well (which they wont as they have no liability) and upheld it, they use the same calculation method.

As you describe it, the complaint has been upheld but the redress calculation (which is defined by the FSA and the same once the FOS tells the companies to use) shows you have no financial loss. So, unless you feel the figures input are wrong then there is no point going to the FOS.

If you dont mind me asking were any of your reasons similar to the above?

It doesnt make any difference what others have got. You won your complaint. You are just not financially worse off. Its not uncommon to find upheld complaints with no redress payable.

denisiw

I would be grateful for any advice on the following please.

Yesterday I was contacted by a company (EMC from Ipswich) offering to try to claim compensation for missold endowments. They are offering a No-Win No-Fee but take 35% + VAT of any compensation won.

They may have known that I had endowments as I looked into selling them in 2003 because of the projected short fall. I told him that I had encashed them in 2004. The money offered by the insurers, Royal & Sun Alliance (taken out in 1985) and Prudential (taken out in 1987), was more than I would have got if I had sold them. I wasn't that impressed with what I received but it was a choice I had to make. I had already tried to claim back from C&G who sold me the Royal endowment but it was rejected on the grounds that I was not any worse off than if I'd had a repayment mortgage. Even though the C&G manager had said that we would be able to pay off our mortgage and have a lump sum at the end of the term. He wouldn't entertain giving us anything other than an endowment mortgage, he was very persuasive, to the point of being intimidating. If only I'd known then what I know now!

I assumed that there was nothing I could do about the Prudential one.

Is there anything I can do?

Cheers.

Denis

MattyA

dunstonh wrote: »

Even an endowment that is not on track to hit target can still be better than the position you would have been in had you been on a repayment mortgage at that particular point.

If you can evidence that you did not need life assurance (not including death in service) then usually you can get that overturned. If you are married and/or have children then you have little hope of that.
it would do. The lower monthly cost of an endowment mortgage was one of the most common reasons for people doing the endowment mortgage. Switching to repayment basis will cost more. You cant have it both ways.

irrelevant as the redress calculation uses the surrender value and not the current value.
Seems like logical reasons. Just a failing to explain why.
The insurers have the liability here. Not the lender. The lender will refer you to the insurer. It doesnt matter anyway as you won your complaint. So, even if they did look at it as well (which they wont as they have no liability) and upheld it, they use the same calculation method.

As you describe it, the complaint has been upheld but the redress calculation (which is defined by the FSA and the same once the FOS tells the companies to use) shows you have no financial loss. So, unless you feel the figures input are wrong then there is no point going to the FOS.

It doesnt make any difference what others have got. You won your complaint. You are just not financially worse off. Its not uncommon to find upheld complaints with no redress payable.

Thanks for your comments - but am I missing something here?
It seems win win for the insurers and lenders - the only reason I am on track to pay off my mortgage is because I took action (at my cost) to ensure this happened by switching to a repayment mortgage once it became apparant that the endowment was not going to do its job.
I even kept them for a couple of years to see if they would make some kind of investment for the future - but their preformance was quite frankly dire.

Quote:
c) My converting from endowment to repayment mortgage and the associated costs and increased mortgage payments.
it would do. The lower monthly cost of an endowment mortgage was one of the most common reasons for people doing the endowment mortgage. Switching to repayment basis will cost more. You cant have it both ways.

Your comment re cant have it both ways I dont understand - I choose the endowment mortgage,yes because it was the cheapest option , but also because I was advised that it would do its job & based on information at that time would likely leave me with a surplus.
The surplus was never counted on but paying my mortgage off most certainly was.
Why else would you anyone take one out?

Therefore if I had to change to revert to my original target of paying off my mortgage,surely there should be redress for the associated additional costs.

Quote:
d) The surrender value of the endowments being less than their value / what I had paid into them.
irrelevant as the redress calculation uses the surrender value and not the current value.

Why is thius irrelevant when it cost me money to get back on track & yet the insurers made money out of me when I purchased the endowment,month on month in fees whislt I paid for something which was not fit for purpose & then again when I eventually sold it back to them at a loss when it beacame more than apparant that it was not going to acheive its goal.

Quote:
I dont know whether to go straight to the FOS or tackle the actual lender (Halifax & Northern rock)who sold me the endowments with their mortgage first.
The insurers have the liability here. Not the lender. The lender will refer you to the insurer. It doesnt matter anyway as you won your complaint. So, even if they did look at it as well (which they wont as they have no liability) and upheld it, they use the same calculation method.

As you describe it, the complaint has been upheld but the redress calculation (which is defined by the FSA and the same once the FOS tells the companies to use) shows you have no financial loss. So, unless you feel the figures input are wrong then there is no point going to the FOS.

Again why,I was sold the policies by the lender alongside & to pay off the mortgage that I was taking out with the?
Just wondered as it seems not to have been thje case for MacBeth.

Not having a pop at you by the way ,just more than a little frustrated that it has cost me more money than it should have done.