Missold Endowment - Charge for Endowment File

Davestra

I've just complained to Legal & General about being missold my endowment policy. I used the complaint letter format provided on the Which site. One of the things I asked for was a copy of the endowment file they have on me. L&G says this is a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act and will provide the details within 40 days if I send a cheque for £10. Is this correct and do I need my endowment file to pusue my complaint?
Any help or advise would be appreciated.
Cheers
Dave

dunstonh

One of the things I asked for was a copy of the endowment file they have on me.

That is an unusual request to make with a complaint. Indeed, it is one that they can refuse as well.

L&G says this is a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act and will provide the details within 40 days if I send a cheque for £10. Is this correct

yes it is correct and you are lucky they are not refusing.

do I need my endowment file to pusue my complaint?

No.

Annisele

Some of the template complaint letters floating around include a request for an "endowment file"; I've never understood why as you don't need it to complain.

OP - if there's anything specific you want, ask for that. Otherwise, just make your complaint - ideally in your own words and explaining why you believe your endowment was mis-sold to you (L&G will know the template letters off by heart; they're marginally more likely to pay attention to your own words).

holly_hobby

SAR will give you everything that is held by the provider in respect of the denoted account (e.g all documentation issued over the term to date, copy telephone recordings etc). The quoted £10 is the maximum fee that may be charged under the DPA, by the provider for the provision of such information.

Although it is not required by you, in order to make a complaint, neither can the provider lawfully refuse any SAR request made under the terms of the DPA - so although actually within in your full rights to make such a request, it is un-necessary to incur the quoted £10 fee in the given circumstances.

As already stated, your complaint letter to the provider, should be clear and concise in respect to your concerns.

One word I would say, that if this is in respect of a Low Cost Endowment not achieving its target figure, you will probably find that your compalint is "out of time" - unless there are extenuating circumstances to the delay.

Hope this helps

Holly

magpiecottage

I suspect that your complaint will now be timebarred.

Davestra

Thanks to everyone for your comments. It would appear that having the information may not necessarily help with my original complaint therefore I shall not pursue and not pay the £10 at the moment. You are correct it is a low cost endowment that matures next November 12. I should have complained earlier when I was first advised that my policy was "at risk" but stupidly expected all the hype to die down from a few years ago and that the policy would, by the end of the 25 year term actually perform overall and provide me the target amount plus the savings that was advised at the outset. We really were poorly advised as it was sold that an endowment was the only way to go in 1987 and the expectation over a 25 year term was very high. By the way, when were the timelines for complaining actually advised?
Cheers
Dave

dunstonh

We really were poorly advised as it was sold that an endowment was the only way to go in 1987

In 1987, that was still the view. Which? (consumers association) were still recommending endowments then and had this site existed, then no doubt it would have a best buy section on endowments.

the expectation over a 25 year term was very high.

Correct.

By the way, when were the timelines for complaining actually advised?

Most started applying timebar countdowns from 2001-2004. By 2007/8, most endowments completed their timebar. You had three years from first being notified of a high risk of a shortfall. Most typically handled the warnings and notification of your last date to complain via your statements.

Dick_here

dunstonh wrote: »

Most started applying timebar countdowns from 2001-2004. By 2007/8, most endowments completed their timebar. You had three years from first being notified of a high risk of a shortfall. Most typically handled the warnings and notification of your last date to complain via your statements.

I wonder what is the latest timebar. I've got one that lasts until December this year

Meeper

It will be a certain number of years since you received the first warning letter.

holly_hobby

The purchase of your policy in 1987 (notwithstanding the timebarring issue) was actually pre regulation and the introduction of the Financial Services Act, which came into effect April 1988.

This means that the provider/"adviser" had no obligation to ensure the suitability of the product to your requirements or risk profile, although they could not make mis-leading or inaccurate statements.

As a result, most providers won't entertain any complaints re suitability on pre A day policies - and there will be very little POS documentation on file from the period.

Low cost endowment (LCE) mortgages at the time had a much lower monthly costing than capital and interest mortgages, and LCE returns were much more healthy than they are in todays market - which made them a popular choice. Indeed low cost endowments effected in the 80s and earlier, generally produced a sum in excess of target at maturity.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and if the industry could have predicted that markets and profits would fall so significantly, or become so volatile, resulting in many LCEs not meeting their targets, I don't believe any responsible adviser or provider would have promoted them as a repayment vehicle - but of course this change in circumstances wasn't known in 1987 or for some years after

As a result in market changes, industry requirements to issue re-visited EMVs and the resulting red letters, initially commenced around 10 yrs ago.

From the details of the case, I do feel that there is little to be gained by the submission of any complaint - notwithstanding that one can't be compensated for loss of expectation.

In respect of this, I feel that your efforts would be better placed in plannning and making provision for any expected shortfall (to target figure) at maturity.

I am sorry if this isn't what you wanted to hear, but do hope this guidance is of some help ...

Holly

Davestra

Again, thanks to all for your comments. L&G have already responded and stated that they will not pursue my complaint due the the timelines involved. I have already made other provisions for the predicted £11k shortfall (from a target of £46k), so take on board all your comments. I should have been more dilligent at the time when the warning letters started to appear!!
Cheers
Dave