Am I timed out on endowment

mickwoo

Please can someone advise me.
I took an endowment mortgage out 24 years ago and was told by an advisor(a friend of a friends dad) that endowment was way to go as it was a win win situation my repayments would be lower and at the end of my term I would easily receive between £13000-£18000 I asked him about repayment mortgages but he said dont was your time and money,I asked him again as my parents had told me to get a repayment,but was told again its waste of money and time so I took his advice and took out an endowment mortgage.
Over the past few years I have received the warning letters about my endowment short fall.I was talking to a friend about what had happened but he told me it was tough luck as I took out the endowment before the rules on miss sold endowments.
Can anyone tell me if this is true.

I took out mortgage in 1987
Originally policy was with Scottish amicable now Prudential.

Any help or advice would be really appreciated.

Thanks

Annisele

You're almost certainly out of time.

If you've received a warning letter that says there's a "high risk" (rather than a "risk") of a shortfall, and you received that letter more than three years ago, and the letter told you that you had until [some date before now] to complain, then you're definitely out of time.

If the policy was sold by a small company*, you are also too late. (*I'm using 'small' to mean 'not covered by the Financial Ombudsman Service's voluntary jurisdiction for pre-April 88 cases'. Those two things aren't exactly the same, but usually they're pretty close).

dunstonh

I took an endowment mortgage out 24 years ago

That makes it pre-regulation. So, if you bought via an IFA, accountant or solicitor or the firm is no longer trading, then you cannot complain.

Unless it was an agent of Scot Amicable that you bought it through then you have never been able to have a complaint reviewed. If it was an agent of Scot Am then you can complain to Pru. However, be aware that any complaint will be reviewed based on the rules that were in place at the time and Pru have been using the Time Bar rules (3 years from first being notified of high risk of shortfall).

virgin_moneysaver

we're in the same situation - took ours out in April 1987 - was shown the difference between the payments if endowment or repayment, it was literally pence and the IFA said we'd be mad not to take the endowment as we would have a lump sum on maturity - once it all kicked off and started receiving the shortfall letters wrote to Standard Life who said they were not liable as we were pre- legislation, and to claim against the IFA, who had stopped trading and had since passed away. When we moved house we had the mortgage in 2 parts, the guaranteed amount of the endowment at that time we put on IO and the rest repayment.

dunstonh

we're in the same situation - took ours out in April 1987 - was shown the difference between the payments if endowment or repayment, it was literally pence and the IFA said we'd be mad not to take the endowment

IFAs didnt exist until 1988. So, if you took it out in 1987, it wouldnt be an IFA. It is probable they went on to become IFAs under polarisation though.

once it all kicked off and started receiving the shortfall letters wrote to Standard Life who said they were not liable as we were pre- legislation

Which is incorrect. They are not liable because they never gave the advice. Not because it is pre-regulation.

the IFA, who had stopped trading and had since passed away.

So, game over.

virgin_moneysaver

dunstonh wrote: »

IFAs didnt exist until 1988. So, if you took it out in 1987, it would be an IFA. It is probable they went on to become IFAs under polarisation though.



Which is incorrect. They are not liable because they never gave the advice. Not because it is pre-regulation.



So, game over.

the deceased chap was a 'money' guy attached to the estate agents, he was some sort of Financial Advisor, didn't realise IFA's didn't come in until the following year

I, perhaps, worded it incorrectly (we are talking trying to remember a conversation from nearly 25 years ago!) the result of the correspondence with SF was that my only recourse was with the advisor

the result is still the same : game over :cool: