MSE News: HSBC to pay £40m for mis-selling to the elderly

le_loup

dunstonh wrote: »

The reason that they would have done investment bonds is to keep money out of the means test and/or reduce IHT liability. Typically the former.

Read that again Paully. That is what it was all about and I venture most of the "victims" knew that was what it was all about. You may be different.

jamesd

What happened in many of the cases here was that the products were sold to people who were about to move into residential care. Typical life expectancy is in the two to three year range in many such cases. Ability to take out money fast enough to pay the bills and not suffer large penalties if death happens within the high probability timespan also matters.

HSBC isn't really to blame, though. It was them who reported the matter to the FSA when they found out what the company they had purchased had been doing. They also shut down the company when the investigations made the extent of the issue apparent.

Paully232000

le_loup wrote: »

Read that again Paully. That is what it was all about and I venture most of the "victims" knew that was what it was all about. You may be different.

Like I said before, the amount of the estate was below the threshold for inheritance tax, so this would never have been an issue. And if you mean the means test for paying for residential care, then this was paid fully by my relative so again, not an issue. I guess by your comment, that you do not agree with the redress payments to the non-existent victims.

Jamesd: Yes this was the case for my relative, had recently moved to residential/nursing care.

le_loup

No, you may not assume that.
What you may assume is my disapproval of the victim culture.
You may assume that I don't think all older people are victims.
You may assume that I think (know) that many of the "victims" colluded in their investment choices ... 'til it went wrong.
You may assume that I believe that if an employee of a financial company rips-off anyone, it is criminal.
You may assume that I admire HSBC for doing absolutely the right thing without outside pressure.

It appears you were genuinely disadvantaged and received correct redress.
What else are you looking for?

Paully232000

Thank you for letting me know what I can assume, much obliged.

What I want to know, as I dont know anything about redress payments, or what investments would on average return (and I know they can go down as well), is how would one know the amount of redress actually do put one back to the position they would have been should the poor investments not have been used/advised.

dunstonh

Whilst they did wrong, i think it is fair to say that there are going to be some very lucky people getting redress who do not deserve it. i.e. those that knew what they were doing and are taking advantage of poor returns to get their money back. I am sure that had the credit crunch and global recession not occurred that many of them would not be looking for compensation now.

hat I want to know, as I dont know anything about redress payments, or what investments would on average return (and I know they can go down as well), is how would one know the amount of redress actually do put one back to the position they would have been should the poor investments not have been used/advised.

cash savings rates typically. Money in minus money out plus interest. For some, that may well mean the redress is lower than current value and therefore nothing is paid.

Paully232000

Thanks for the last reply, if that is correct then he was given more redress that what you state would be normal "cash savings rates typically. Money in minus money out plus interest".

The reason I am asking the questions are that banks don't normally give money away for nothing, and my relative didn't ask for this and just got a letter out of the blue stating that they are looking at the case, and then another one stating how much they would be receiving.

dunstonh

he reason I am asking the questions are that banks don't normally give money away for nothing,

You are forgetting what they earned on it originally and the level of fine the FSA can levy if they dont. Remember that the FSA ruling required them to look at each case automatically. So, even the slightest failing can lead to redress.

Paully232000

"You are forgetting what they earned on it originally and the level of fine the FSA can levy if they dont. Remember that the FSA ruling required them to look at each case automatically. So, even the slightest failing can lead to redress."

Yes very true I had forgotten about the commission, and looking through the internet on this subject it appears to be quite substantial.
Thanks for the reply, very helpful.

KatClimpsopn

I'm conscious this is an old thread, but I haven't been able to find a more current discussion about the compensation being offered by HSBC for possible NHFA mis-selling.

I've recently recived a letter with an offer from HSBC, and I've been looking around for a forum where people in the same position are comparing notes, but I haven't been able to find any.

Has any Moneysavers here got any pointers to a place where these issues are being discussed?