Missold by Nationwide ?

50Twuncle

I need a little advice re PPI
I was sold a policy by Nationwide, in approx 2006 - which supposedly protected my mortgage payments in the event of my losing my job - This cost approx £45 per month.

We paid the mortgage off in 2009

My argument is that - should I have lost my job in the 3 years that the policy ran for - Nationwide would not have paid out - since I have "health issues" and despite the salesman realising this at the point of signing - no mention of my pre-existing conditions were made on the policy .....

What are my chances of getting this money - reimbursed now ?
And how do I go about putting in a claim ?

shackalak

Nationwide MPPI policies do not have medical underwriting. If the policy was to protect redundancy not illness it would have paid out if you had lost your job through redundancy. If you had lost your job you would have been glad you took it.

dunstonh

I was sold a policy by Nationwide, in approx 2006 - which supposedly protected my mortgage payments in the event of my losing my job - This cost approx £45 per month.

Good. That means it was set up correctly (monthly is how they should be). Plus, you were employed at point of sale.

My argument is that - should I have lost my job in the 3 years that the policy ran for - Nationwide would not have paid out - since I have "health issues" and despite the salesman realising this at the point of signing - no mention of my pre-existing conditions were made on the policy .....

Just because you have medical conditions does not mean you are not covered. If they are long term illnesses then they will not usually cover that illness or anything that is related to it. They will cover other illnesses though. The only time the pre-existing condition complaint works if the condition is severe enough to make the coverage so low that it isnt worth it.

50Twuncle

dunstonh wrote: »

Good. That means it was set up correctly (monthly is how they should be). Plus, you were employed at point of sale.



Just because you have medical conditions does not mean you are not covered. If they are long term illnesses then they will not usually cover that illness or anything that is related to it. They will cover other illnesses though. The only time the pre-existing condition complaint works if the condition is severe enough to make the coverage so low that it isnt worth it.

Mine is a long term illness/condition - so you are saying that I can or can't claim ?
And as it happens - I WAS made redundant, 2 months after I paid off the mortgage !!

dunstonh

Mine is a long term illness/condition - so you are saying that I can or can't claim ?

If the illness prevents a claim on any illness being accepted then you should complain.
If the insurer are only refusing claims on that illness (or those that may be linked to it) then there are no grounds for complaint as that is quite normal.

50Twuncle

dunstonh wrote: »

If the illness prevents a claim on any illness being accepted then you should complain.
If the insurer are only refusing claims on that illness (or those that may be linked to it) then there are no grounds for complaint as that is quite normal.

I have not yet approached Nationwide - I am asking whether it is worth my bothering ?

dunstonh

21Twinkle wrote: »

I have not yet approached Nationwide - I am asking whether it is worth my bothering ?

Depends on the illness. If it is the type of illness that could lead to all sorts of associated illnesses or medical conditions then chances are the coverage offered would be poor and you would have a good complaint reason.

If the illness is just in one area and doesnt lead to other conditions then the policy would still typically pay out if an unrelated condition occurred. So, no grounds for complaint in that case.

50Twuncle

dunstonh wrote: »

Depends on the illness. If it is the type of illness that could lead to all sorts of associated illnesses or medical conditions then chances are the coverage offered would be poor and you would have a good complaint reason.

If the illness is just in one area and doesnt lead to other conditions then the policy would still typically pay out if an unrelated condition occurred. So, no grounds for complaint in that case.

How about an "accident - in which I ended up in a coma for a few days" - albeit 20 years ago - the effects remain - and the long term prognosis is still unknown ??

magpiecottage

The fact that you were made redundant, albeit after the cover was required, does demonstrate a need.

As far as the coma is concerned, it would depend on whether you disclosed it or not at the time. Nationwide can hardly be expected to know about it if you did not.

dunstonh

ow about an "accident - in which I ended up in a coma for a few days" - albeit 20 years ago - the effects remain - and the long term prognosis is still unknown ??

If you suffered a condition that could be linked to that then they would be unlikely to pay out. If you suffered another condition not linked to that they would pay out.

My gut feeling is that the pre-existing medical condition reason isnt going to work here.

50Twuncle

magpiecottage wrote: »

The fact that you were made redundant, albeit after the cover was required, does demonstrate a need.

As far as the coma is concerned, it would depend on whether you disclosed it or not at the time. Nationwide can hardly be expected to know about it if you did not.

No - I did not disclose this at the time - but then I wasn't asked any medical questions at all - which is the whole basis of my argument !!!
If I had put in a claim - would Nationwide have paid out ?
or would they have said "non disclosed medical problems" ?
If the latter - then I am surely entitled to compensation for misselling ?