Over Insured.........CARDIF PINNACLE

marshallka

Turboman wrote: »

You avoiding me gal?

xxxx

Hell no.... just been busy and will leave a message OTR. xxxx

Turboman

marshallka wrote: »

Hell no.... just been busy and will leave a message OTR. xxxx

started excel thread hun xx

marshallka

Well just had an email from another adjudicator at FOS about "over insurance" and they have again sided with Cardif Pinnacle in that if you are already receiving 75% of your income VIA a PHI policy paid over to you, you can still receive full benefit of your ASU/MPPI (which incidently is paid over to you and not the Mortgage company so is classed also as INCOME) and better yourself so there you have it. BOTH policies can be paid at the same time without one reducing the other so they say. Mr Vane at Cardif says he used to work in "claims" apparently and he says that is what he was always lead to believe and that is what he told customers too.

For all you IFA's that did not think you could insure for more than 75% of your income, there you have it, you can!!!

I have asked that it be closed now and not go to the Ombudsman as its seems pointless. (In fact to me FOS are pointless!! Not one of my complaints have they helped with. I am not saying I have not won but they have not won for me.!!! I have had to do it on my own). Maybe now I can see why solicitors are used!!!

marshallka

I have just found the two letters from Pinnacle of when we took the policy out. One was because they had my husband down as a Fixed Contract worker (which he was not) and one was over pre existing medical conditions as we had ticked "yes" to them. It was taken out on the 4th August, 2004 and we called on that date (being the 4th August as we have a letter from them on that date over "further to our telephone conversation today...." and then again with another advisor on the 17th August which was to amend again and it was during this call that I read out that we had a policy with work (and I have photocopied with these letters) that covered his salary in the event of illness for 75% gross income after company sick pay finishes at 6 months. I did not know it was called PHI but I said it was a sickness/accident/disability long term policy (and also did not have the terms and conditions of it). I was told by the advisor that it would be fine to claim on both policies at the same time (even when knowing that our other policy was for 75% income) and also they noted some "pre existing conditions" and omitted them from claims. I have now given the FOS the exact dates and times of the calls and also the names of the advisors who signed the letters. I knew we had called within the "cancellation" period to discuss the policy but they state it was a non advised sale. I went and said to FOS it was actually before we took this out BUT it was just after submitting the details and within the cancellation period. TWO phone calls were made. Would this then be "advised" as we discussed the sale in detail going through all medical conditions and work etc?????

Pinnacle should now be able to trace the phone calls and dates of the phone calls etc surely. They are documented but they say they have no records of us taking the insurance out. They have used with FOS "what they would likely to have done".....

Oh and did not CLOSE the complaint as I said above as it is too important to us to do that.

marshallka

They knew of it when I emailed their customer services to ask the question last year

Thank you for your recent e-mail.

I can confirm that may be able to claim on both policies however the
benefit payable may be reduced by Friends Provident to ensure that you are
not receiving more than 75% of your income, this would increase again after
your claim with us stopped.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Why were we not told this when we took this out?

Before we actually cancelled the policy we asked and got TWO replies




Thank you for your recent e-mail.

I can confirm that you can claim on two insurance policies if you are not over-insuring yourself. According to our personal guidelines we class someone as over-insured if the total monthly benefit amount exceeds 60% of their gross monthly income.

However, to allow us to continue to assess your refund, please send us a copy of your Policy Terms and Conditions with your other insurers so that we can confirm for our records that you have had duplicate Accident and Sickness cover, as your other Schedule states it is for Long Term Sickness.
Kindly note that if that part of the cover is found by us to be duplicated, you will be entitled to a refund of the Accident and Sickness part of your premiums as the unemployment part would not have been duplicated.


If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.


Yours Sincerely,

Ai

(we have argued that we would not have taken redundancy alone... it was not an option in 2004 with them). We have a good redundancy package and it was not an option to take out A and S alone either.

marshallka

Dunstonh, this is the reply you posted for me last year


The rules as I understand them is that there is a 60-75% limit on protection (depending on whether its employer paid/self paid as to how much the limit is) and that it includes ALL income protections. Not just ASU/MPPI, PPI, PHI, loan/credit card, employer sick pay, waiver of premium on pensions even.

However, there may be a little clause that exists that if the payment protection goes towards the mortgage (or related item) without actually being paid to your account first, then it does not go towards the limit. If it does that it doesnt get included in any means tests for benefits (unlike those that pay to your account). However, getting confirmation on whether it is included in the overall limit is difficult. It's also a bit outside of my normal area and I'm rusty when it comes to protection (I employ another adviser to handle protections but he is on holiday at the moment)


This is the reply I got from Cardif customer service also on two occasions last year and was actually agreed we were over insured BUT this Mr V from Cardif who finalised the complaint says different. They then chaned their story. We were not told this information when we "queried this" before and they did not have "terms and conditions" of any policies just last year when they replied. (which is another argument they have used against me!!)

Please can someone give their opinion on this about finding the letters whereby we did discuss the policy before accepting within the cancellation period.

di3004

Marshallka I am so sorry to hear this.

It does make you think why some turn to solicitors.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

Marshallka I am so sorry to hear this.

It does make you think why some turn to solicitors.

Yep, I admit I was wrong about solicitors. You do need solicitors for some complaints. I thought FOS also looked at what was fair too. Also on complaints handling (having been told BY PINNACLE CUSTOMER SERVICE before complaining that they would consider someone over insured who is insured for more than 65% of their income but fail to say that when complaining after cancelling the policy on this information) and the fact this complaint was upheld by one manager and then passed from pillar to post. So unfair.

Solicitors should not be needed but they are.

Do you think that FOS are being unfair anyone??? Opinions on this one.

di3004

marshallka wrote: »

Yep, I admit I was wrong about solicitors. You do need solicitors for some complaints. I thought FOS also looked at what was fair too. Also on complaints handling (having been told BY PINNACLE CUSTOMER SERVICE before complaining that they would consider someone over insured who is insured for more than 65% of their income but fail to say that when complaining after cancelling the policy on this information) and the fact this complaint was upheld by one manager and then passed from pillar to post. So unfair.

Solicitors should not be needed but they are.

Do you think that FOS are being unfair anyone??? Opinions on this one.

There does seem to be more rejections recently doesn't there?

I know they have been over-run with complaints even more so over the JR period, which makes you think if they are rushing through and overlooking them.

marshallka

di3004 wrote: »

There does seem to be more rejections recently doesn't there?

I know they have been over-run with complaints even more so over the JR period, which makes you think if they are rushing through and overlooking them.

Di, FOS have just taken a dislike to "all" MY complaints. I honestly feel like that. Obviously I am the scum of the earth.