Endowment shortfall

koptronuk

We have had a mortgage for the last 20 years or so and found that we have a shortfall with our endowment.we have looked around at some companies for compensation but they all take anywhere between 20 and 28%.Can you please advise me of any companies that dont take so much commission and work on a NO WIN-NO FEE basis.Also is there a time limit to claim for mis-sold motgage endowment as we are in our final 5-7 years.

Regards.

jm28cardiff

Hi, I work for an insurance company, dealing with endowment complaints. Those third party complaint handling companies are a complete waste of time, all they do is get in the way, and they can't do anything extra for you, you dont have more chance of success going through them. If you complain direct to the company, they have to investigate it, and if you don't agree with their findings, you can still refer it the the Financial Ombudsman Service.

You have six years from the time of recieving your first "red" letter to complain, or else the company can time bar you.

dunstonh

We have had a mortgage for the last 20 years or so and found that we have a shortfall with our endowment.

What about every statement for the last 5 years which had projection rates and warnings on them?

Projections are not a guarantee of shortfall. They are an indication that if a particular rate of return is used you may end up with that figure. That rate could be overstating or understating the real performance.

Can you please advise me of any companies that dont take so much commission and work on a NO WIN-NO FEE basis.

Its called yourself. The complaints process is free to use and only requires you to put a complaint in with your reasons. There is no need to use a complaints company and recent stats publish show that people using complaints companies are less successful than those that put their own complaints in.

Also is there a time limit to claim for mis-sold motgage endowment as we are in our final 5-7 years.

You can be time barred and this is increasingly the case. I got an email from my network a month or so back saying that manyof the mainstream providers are now succesfully time barred from complaining and the remaining will be very soon.

Who is the endowment with?
How did you purchase the endomwent (i.e. what was the status of the adviser - tied or independent or did you buy direct?)

netty_betty_2

we are also in the same boat as you, we have aprox 6 years left on a 25 year morgage, unfortunatly we were too late to claim and have been time barred, we also refered our claim to the financial ombudsman, but they sided with the insurance company, in short i feel totally let down, we have started to put a little extra away each week to cover our shortfall, goodluck with your claim, you may be one of the lucky ones!!!

jm28cardiff

A lot of policies that were getting "red letters" a while back are now back in green....maybe we will get a whole load of fresh complaints from people who have succesfully complained, recieved compensation (and surrendered their polices) and now wish they had kept them when they hear of the surpluses other people are getting 10 years down the road!

netty_betty_2

jm28cardiff wrote:

A lot of policies that were getting "red letters" a while back are now back in green....maybe we will get a whole load of fresh complaints from people who have succesfully complained, recieved compensation (and surrendered their polices) and now wish they had kept them when they hear of the surpluses other people are getting 10 years down the road!

thats good to know!!! so maybe its not all bad:beer:

defender_of_the_weak

A few corrections to some of the nonsense put forward

Its not six years from the first red letter it is only three (given this was posted by someone who is supposed to understand the issues by working for an insurance company) it rather casts a shadow over other comments made.

The reference to 'these companies' is just the same as saying all advisers are rubbish and you can make the same decisions without going to an IFA.

Staistics referrring to success rates were put forward by the Association of British Insurers (they are the people who put the time bar rules in to start with). Was this because they wanted to fair to their customers or protect their members profits from the mistakes in previous management?

Specific question ' Does anyone know a company that does not charge as much' Yes, we only chatrge 10% plus VAT.

Uphold rates (you wont be more succesful, see ABI comment above)

We win 72% of cases referred to the Ombudsman, they uphold an average of 31%. Overall uphold rate 90% plus which could be compared with the Abbey who rejected 90% plus of all complaints before being chatsised by the regulator and told to do it again. Abbey standard response to any sale made before 1988, complaint rejected. Overturn rate on referral to Ombudsman 100%

jm28cardiff

Mr Defender, you own of these ambulance chasers then? This is just my opinion (and of course im biased), but companies of this type are parasites and should be banned. If a complaint is upheld, standard redress should put the person in the position they would have been in had they taken a repayment mortgage at the outset, but thats not the position people end up in if they hand over 25% (or 10% in your case) to the third party complaint handling company.

All these companies do is send in a pre prepared complaint letter (often not personalised, full of nonsense to try and look clever, and often with completely irrelevant complaints). They then act as a barrier between the company and the complainant (need questions answered? Cant speak to the complainant, speak to the third party who relay the questions for you). Need a questionnaire filled in? Can't send it to the complainant, send it to the third party, who send it to the complainant, who send it back to the third party, who then send it to the company, causing a pointless delay. And thats pretty much it. Complaint rejected? OK, you refer it to FOS, which involves photocopying the original letter of complaint and sending it to them, and the complainants filling out a couple more questionnaires. Is that worth 25% of any potential redress? Or 10%? Its not even worth 1%. Anyone who has an ongoing complaint at the moment through a third party, ask yourself what are they actually doing for you. The answer, in every case, is nothing.

dunstonh

jm28cardiff, DOTW does act in a professional manner on these forums and has given useful advice to people. It is fair to say that he has changed my views in part towards some claims companies. They are not all parasites like Morgan Green for example.

However, I can understand why you have your views as we have been told that a number of claims companies use the same letter for everyone and list every potential mis-sale area there is in the hope one will apply. I would not be surprised if it those companies that have the poor success rate.

jm28cardiff

OK, I'll modify my statement a bit! The big companies, the ones that advertise on TV etc, are some of the ones that I think are poor. They send in 5 page complaint letters, sometimes with 22 or more complaint points. They complain about "into retirement" when the person will be 47 at maturity! They complain that no Fact Find was completed, when there is a 16 page Fact Find on file signed by the clients!

Some of the solicitors who do this sort of thing are not much better. I had a letter once where I didnt understand one of the complaint points, as it was written in legalise jargon. I rang them up to ask what it meant, and the person said they didnt know either and told me to ignore it!

I just don't see what these companies do that people couldn't do for themselves, but then I guess some people may be intimidated by the whole process and want someone to do it for them.

EdInvestor

jm28cardiff wrote:

I just don't see what these companies do that people couldn't do for themselves, but then I guess some people may be intimidated by the whole process and want someone to do it for them.

As you will be well aware Abbey is not the only provider which routinely rejected justified complaints and was told by the regulator to go back and do it again.

People are not stupid.They know they may not be treated fairly, whether by the selling company or by the FOS. So they seek help.

Complaint handlers would not have viable businesses if the existing complaints and arbitration system worked properly and was seen as fair.

I'd have thought that's pretty obvious.