Endowment missselling - life insurance element

Jorayner

I have two complaints underway at present. One with Legal and General had to go the the FSCS, and I have had the judgement back.

One of my complaints was that we already had life insurane in place and that we did not need the life insurance element of the endowment. We had no dependents at the time of sale - just husband and wife.

In the calculations they compare the cost of the interest only mortgage + endownment policy + surrender value with cost of repayment + decreasing term life assurance.

Should the decreasing term life assurance be included if that is part of my complaint?

Any thoughts welcomed.

dunstonh

Yes, the life cover should be included. You had a joint mortgage meaning that you were jointly liable for the repayment of the mortgage. A spouse is a dependent unless they have sufficient income in their own right.

Death in service, if you had that, is not usually included as it an unreliable source for life assurance plus it is a master trust and the payment may not go to the person that becomes liable for the mortgage.

Jorayner

Thank you for explaining that to me, Dunstonh

vinno65

hi dunstonh,
she said she already had life insurance in place no mention of death in service benefits. If the life insurance was adequate to cover the mortgage if either party died then whats the need for further life insurance?
Jorayner if the above is true i woud ask them to recalculate without the cost of decreasing life insurance been included as its quite clear it wasn't required.
regards Vinno

dunstonh

she said she already had life insurance in place no mention of death in service benefits.

I saw no reference to any particular type of life assurance. So I covered off the two likely areas which could apply.

If the life insurance was adequate to cover the mortgage if either party died then whats the need for further life insurance?

And how many people have adequate life assurance? a minority.

Jorayner if the above is true i woud ask them to recalculate without the cost of decreasing life insurance been included as its quite clear it wasn't required.

How can you jump to the assumption that it is clear it wasnt required when we dont know if it is or isnt?

Jorayner

It was death in service benefit.Each of us had enough individual cover to pay off the mortgage in the event of death.

Thankfully we are both still hear to tell the tale.

I can see that this is different to a life policy as it did not have to be assigned.