Case for a mis-sold endowment - am I too late???

bob808

Is it too late to claim a mis-sold endowment?

'You have either six years from when you bought your policy, or three years from the date you realised it might have been mis-sold – whichever is longer.' I bought my policy in August 1999 but may have realised it was mis-sold lastnight?!?...

I have found a letter from the financial advisor, who sold the policy, following a warning letter Legal & General. In his letter the financial advisor advises "I will continue to monitor your plan on a regular basis to make sure it will provide at least the amount required to pay off your mortgage at the end of the term". This was back in 2000 and we have not heard again from him since.

Last year Legal & General issued us with an 'Amber Alert. Significant Risk of a Shortfall'.

Thanks for your input everyone

dunstonh

'You have either six years from when you bought your policy, or three years from the date you realised it might have been mis-sold – whichever is longer.' I bought my policy in August 1999 but may have realised it was mis-sold lastnight?!?...

The three years from notification of high risk of not hiting target is when it really matters.

In your case though, if its a unit linked endowment that started in 99, then its not going to be in a high risk position and indeed, it could be easily at break even or hearing for a surplus.

In his letter the financial advisor advises "I will continue to monitor your plan on a regular basis to make sure it will provide at least the amount required to pay off your mortgage at the end of the term". This was back in 2000 and we have not heard again from him since.

Stupid thing for him to say and it would breach TCF rules if it was done today. However, TCF rules didnt exist in 99. That said, a commitment to ensure it hits target is a bit like saying it will as long as I do xyz and he hasnt done xyz.

Last year Legal & General issued us with an 'Amber Alert. Significant Risk of a Shortfall'.

They would do. Even if the endowment is above target, you would get an amber at this point. Its inevitable due to the flaws in the projection system.

You can complain. Nothing stops you. However, you would expect a 1999 case to be written to a fairly decent standard, at least as far as the risk warnings are concerned. In that letter, if it has the risk warnings about may not hit target etc then you are fairly stumped.