Mis-sold Life Insurance Help

mikeyg_2

Also a couple of final questions,

If I were to surrender my endowment policy, would this preclude any complaint and compensation claim regarding my wife's policy?

Also would cancelling the life insurance policy also preclude a complaint/claim?

I should have said earlier that the company concerned is Barclays, and the policies were taken out via one of their in-house advisors. I don't know if he was employed directly by them or whether he was freelance.

dunstonh

I was thinking that adding my wife to the endowment policy would have been an alternative as it would have increased the monthly investment which would presumably have increased the payment on maturity. Thereby reducing the risk of there being a shortfall on the target amount.

Many providers, indeed most, would not allow you to amend an endowment policy in force. Any amendment on sum assured or premium would reset the qualifying clock (for tax purposes) and could create a tax liability which would not exist if left alone. Nearly always, starting an additional plan was what you would expect.

But it seems from what your saying it seems like I have no basis for complaint?

Without seeing the documentation its hard to say but what you have said so far suggests that adviser has pretty well covered themselves in making covers the product sold.

If I were to surrender my endowment policy, would this preclude any complaint and compensation claim regarding my wife's policy?

Also would cancelling the life insurance policy also preclude a complaint/claim?

no.

I should have said earlier that the company concerned is Barclays, and the policies were taken out via one of their in-house advisors. I don't know if he was employed directly by them or whether he was freelance.

Depends on when it was done. Is it Barclays life or legal and general? Or is it someone different?

mikeyg_2

dunstonh wrote: »

Many providers, indeed most, would not allow you to amend an endowment policy in force. Any amendment on sum assured or premium would reset the qualifying clock (for tax purposes) and could create a tax liability which would not exist if left alone. Nearly always, starting an additional plan was what you would expect.

It would not have been an amendment to an existing policy. Both policies, [my single endowment and my wifes life policy] began at the same time. My reasoning is that a joint policy[which is what my wife thinks we were originally offered ]offering a joint return would have been better than two seperate policies [one having a return and one not]

dunstonh wrote: »

Is it Barclays life or legal and general? Or is it someone different?

Barclays Life

dunstonh

My reasoning is that a joint policy[which is what my wife thinks we were originally offered ]offering a joint return would have been better than two seperate policies [one having a return and one not]

That is the default and expected option but as I said higher up, separate plans were not uncommon. However, the report should state why separate ones were done instead of a single joint one and the pros and cons.

Barclays Life

Its one of their own in-house sales reps then.

mikeyg_2

dunstonh wrote: »

That is the default and expected option but as I said higher up, separate plans were not uncommon. However, the report should state why separate ones were done instead of a single joint one and the pros and cons.

It doesn't state that in anything I have so I guess thats a starting point in any complaint?

magpiecottage

The fact that it was sold by Barclays means that the original sale would have fallen under the jurisdiction of the Banking Ombudsman (if sold by somebody acting for Legal & General it would have fallen under the jurisdiction of the Insurance Ombudsman or possibly the Personal Investment Authority Ombudsman).

This is important because it means it does fall under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

By comparison, sales of term assurances prior to January 2005, with very few exceptions, by an independent financial adviser did not. One possible exception would be cover for a mortgage (by virtue of the mortgage code).

But the good news for you is that FOS should consider your complaint if you ask - though that does not necessarily mean it will be upheld.

mikeyg_2

Thanks very much for that, I was beginning to think that I shouldn't bother but this seems like a positive step I can take.

transformer34

Hi all, just to let you know that I have won my case and will be getting all my premiums back. If anyone else is in a similar situation, I would encourage you to try to reclaim.

Thanks to all for the advice on here - much appreciated.

waynebrave

transformer34 wrote: »

Well, Zurich were quick off the mark to reply - and pass the buck to a company called Openwork. Anyone heard of them? Apparently its for them to deal with now.

Hi, I am in excatly the same boat as you, having been mis-sold life insurance by a Zurich/Open Work rep. Can you tell me the outcome of your claim please and any tips would be helpful too.

Many thanks

WB

dunstonh

waynebrave wrote: »

Hi, I am in excatly the same boat as you, having been mis-sold life insurance by a Zurich/Open Work rep. Can you tell me the outcome of your claim please and any tips would be helpful too.

Many thanks

WB

Tips will only be useful if we know what your complaint is.