So who is responsible ?

yeman

Hi All
So my question is this " who is responsible for the mis sold endowment policy " ?
The Building Society ( lender ) or their tied agents ?
Thanks A

vax2002

The people that took them out ?
Seriously did they really think you could give your money to someone who spends more on lunch than you get to live off in a week ? and your money would still be there ?, well not only still be there but you would be as rich as those spending your money...
Come off it.

kingstreet

The person who sold you the policy and his/her employer.

Could be a building society or bank adviser; tied agent/company representative of insurance company or independent financial adviser.

dunstonh

Depending on year, it could be a total third party as some building societies used local agents, accountants or solicitors. The liability is with the seller/employer.

yeman

If a lender used a tied agent to sell their product, and the tied agent used one of his unqualified employees to give the right information/mis leading information, just to get a quick commission. Would it not be the lender who is liable as in a care of duty for checking that their tied agents are giving the right advice for the product they are selling for them ?

dunstonh

yeman wrote: »

If a lender used a tied agent to sell their product, and the tied agent used one of his unqualified employees to give the right information/mis leading information, just to get a quick commission. Would it not be the lender who is liable as in a care of duty for checking that their tied agents are giving the right advice for the product they are selling for them ?

Any work done by an unqualified individual in the name of the tied agent is the responsibility of the tied agent and ultimately, the company they represent. That may or may not be the lender depending on the agreement they have in place with the tied company.

opinions4u

Why not tell us the story instead of fishing on the provision of minimal information.

Provide dates, detail the life company, the lender and the company that sold the policy.

yeman

Firstly, thank you for all the replies.
Ok, I'll try to explain.......In 1990 my partner and i were in our early 20s. We heard about a scheme run through the council, named: DIYSO (Do It Yourself Shared Ownership). We proceeded to purchase 50% of a more suitable home having 2 dependants. Went through the mortgage process with the Halifax as only they took on DIYSO.
We were given an Endowment Mortgage for 18,500 and paid deposit of 1,500. The person at the Halifax in a Halifax uniform told us we had to take out life insurance with the mortgage and it had to be with Standard Life as well as MPI in case either came out of work. took months for completion(1991).
In 2000 we had financial problems and had heard of people cashing in life insurance, so made a phone call to SL asking if we could cash ours,no problem, 3 min call and cheque for 2,000 recv,d within 4 days.....no payments missed on rent or mortgage......
Due to mis-leading information regarding the endowment mortgage, we had no idea that the SL insurance was actually a pot for paying back the 18,500, to our understanding the monthly payment to the Halifax was paying a percentage of the interest and a percentage into which the Halifax dealt with on the stock/shares market.
After much reading to understand endowment mortgages, we wrote to the Halifax to explain the situation we were in “they were sorry to hear about our problem but it wasn’t them who sold us the endowment “ .......they said it was a IFA .....yet we had no recollection of any meetings with an IFA.
After many years of writing to every Financial Institute going, being past from here to there we have only in the last few months found that the IFA the Halifax mentioned was in fact a tied agent of the Halifax ....it then comes to light that the tied agent employed an unqualified person , which was the person who sold us the endowment within the Halifax building wearing an Halifax name badge and uniform and younger than ourselves.
So, this is now , the Tied Agent who is supposedly responsible has been retired for a few years and is suffering ill -health therefore we can’t proceed any further ( probably retired comfortably with private health care )
However what I find more fustrating is that I cant help thinking the Halifax are responsible , simply because they had a duty of care to make sure their tied agents explained who they were, and that the right and correct information was being given to their potential customers when selling their products on their behalf.
We have been wanting to purchase the other 50% of the property for years as the rent is extortionate, but how can this be done ,with such a dilemma on the mortgage side.
We are now looking to see whats next, write again to the Halifax with the findings ? or look into court action as enough years have been wasted on this
As well as being mis- sold Prudential Pensions , Mortgage Protection Payment Plan, Bank Charges, Loan PPI, its been a financial nightmare , I bet for most of our generation.....Thank god the banks are now being monitored so the next generation have more of a future and can get on with living their lives.

dunstonh

After many years of writing to every Financial Institute going, being past from here to there we have only in the last few months found that the IFA the Halifax mentioned was in fact a tied agent of the Halifax ....it then comes to light that the tied agent employed an unqualified person , which was the person who sold us the endowment within the Halifax building wearing an Halifax name badge and uniform and younger than ourselves.

It appears from your duplicate post that you bought via an IFA that operated a Halifax counter service in their branch. So, Halifax are correct. They have no liability.

So, this is now , the Tied Agent who is supposedly responsible has been retired for a few years and is suffering ill -health therefore we can’t proceed any further ( probably retired comfortably with private health care )

You would hope they have provided well for themselves.

However what I find more fustrating is that I cant help thinking the Halifax are responsible , simply because they had a duty of care to make sure their tied agents explained who they were, and that the right and correct information was being given to their potential customers when selling their products on their behalf.

Halifax have no duty of care as you didnt buy via them. They had no involvement in it.

We are now looking to see whats next, write again to the Halifax with the findings ? or look into court action as enough years have been wasted on this

Writing to Halifax is pointless. Taking Halifax to court is pointless. Halifax as had no liability or responsibility for you cashing in the endowment over a decade ago.

I am struggling to see what your complaint is. It looks like you are not happy you were allowed to cash the policy in during 2000. However, Halifax wouldnt have known you were cashing it in. You made that choice all by yourself. Had you sought advice first and then acted on that advice then you would have a complaint. However, complaining about it over a decade later is too late

hcb42

ultimately yemen, the responsibility is yours.

holly_hobby

Seems the OP is posting numerous threads on the same subject ... (thanks to Duns for the heads up)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3507909

Holly