MPPI claims against insurance companies

Eddiec

Hello all, as the title says I signed up for MPPI in the back office of an estate agents. At the same time as I was filling out the mortgage application form, I was advised to take out MPPI. Although I was 'steered' towards a different policy by an insurance firm rather than the bank the mortgage was from.

Can't really remember too much about it as it was 12 years ago...!
The insurance company has since changed hands, and I don't even have a policy booklet to see what I'm covered for! (Was Royal Sun Alliance, now First Assist).

Just seems odd that I've changed mortgage companies about 4 times but still have the MPPI with the same insurance firm.

Is it worth me trying to claim, as I don't see many threads about insurance companies, they're all about banks + BS's?

Thanks in advance fellow claimers.

P.s My Missus has got a raft of claims in for various cards/catalogues and loans as she always had PPI even though she was self employed! Whereas I've avoided it like the plague on all my cards/loans etc., With the mortgage being my only PPI.

dunstonh

Just seems odd that I've changed mortgage companies about 4 times but still have the MPPI with the same insurance firm.

Its very common and not odd at all.

Is it worth me trying to claim, as I don't see many threads about insurance companies, they're all about banks + BS's?

Why do you want to complain? What has been done wrong?

Eddiec

Well with all the talk of miss-selling, how am I to be certain that the mortgage adviser was steering me towards the most appropriate policy?

How do I know that the policy wasn't just the one that gave him the best commission?

My mortgage was signed in joint names between me and the missus, and yet she was/is self employed, although the payments come from my bank only. The MPPI was signed in my name only, as far as I am aware, but with the mortgage in joint names, does that affect it?

If I continue with my MPPI payments, I will have been paying it for 17 years when my mortgage ends. I'm covered by sick pay through my work, so why was I 'strongly advised' to take out MPPI?

dunstonh

Well with all the talk of miss-selling, how am I to be certain that the mortgage adviser was steering me towards the most appropriate policy?

Despite all the talk of mis-selling, it is mainly on loan and credit card PPI. Plus, it is still a minority of cases.

If the mortgage adviser was independent (most estate agent ones are not) then they will offer form the market place. If they are a tied provider they will offer their own product.

How do I know that the policy wasn't just the one that gave him the best commission?

That is a question you ask at point of sale. It isnt something you can actually complain about either. Also, if that was a concern of yours then why didnt you use an IFA and not an estate agent adviser?

My mortgage was signed in joint names between me and the missus, and yet she was/is self employed, although the payments come from my bank only.

No complaint reasons there. Most MPPI cover the self employed just fine.

The MPPI was signed in my name only, as far as I am aware, but with the mortgage in joint names, does that affect it?

Nope. Many people just cover the main earner due to budget reasons.

If I continue with my MPPI payments, I will have been paying it for 17 years when my mortgage ends. I'm covered by sick pay through my work, so why was I 'strongly advised' to take out MPPI?

Almost certainly to cover your largest debt in the case of redundancy, accident and sickness. Plus, 12 years ago, it was recommended to do so. It still is today. It is generally regarded as the only type of PPI worth having.

The biggest issue you are likely to have is that most broker/advisers only became regulated in 2005 (not all, some did have a degree of regulation before but most didnt).

magpiecottage

12 years ago was 2000. This predated the GISC code and even if the estate agent represented the insurer for life & pensions it would have been independent when it came to selling general insurance.

In theory you could try a complaint but it has probably never fallen under FOS jurisdiction.

Eddiec

Thank you both for your replies.

As you are both involved in the financial advice trade, I think you have both answered my questions/concerns.

Going by what you say, it must be perfectly normal to have independent mortgage advisers working in estate agents offices. As to how independent they are is open to interpretation I suppose.

When I first switched my mortgage, I used an indy recommended by a friend. I switched to the Abbey Nat and noticed on the final forms that his sign up fee was around £300 from them, as well as the £295 fee paid by me. Not bad for about half a days work, and faxing a few sheets of paper back and forth.

Since then, I've switched my own mortgages at no cost, no exit cost, no external fees, and reduced my term a few years every time.

So, after all that, it looks like I have no claim to make, and everything is all above board.
Thanks again for answering my questions.

Eddie

magpiecottage

Eddiec wrote: »

When I first switched my mortgage, I used an indy recommended by a friend. I switched to the Abbey Nat and noticed on the final forms that his sign up fee was around £300 from them, as well as the £295 fee paid by me. Not bad for about half a days work, and faxing a few sheets of paper back and forth.

That might be the case except that a mortgage broker has to pass professional exams in his own time and at his own expense.

He has to get his business registered with the FSA, which costs a lot of money.

He has to keep money sitting in a bank account doing nothing - because the FSA says so.

He has to pay thousands of pounds in fees to the FSA each year

He has to pay thousands of pounds in levies to FOS each year.

He has to pay thousands of pounds to the Financial Services Compensation Scheme each year to compensate people he has never done business with because they bought unsuitable products which he would never sell.

He has to pay fees to FOS to investigate unfounded complaints - possibly about products that never existed.

Unlike you, who can simply walk away from a complaint about something that happened more than 15 years ago, he can be chased to his grave.

Unlike you, who is presumed innocent until proven guilty, he will be presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Then you have all the stuff that a normal business has to deal with. Premises, fuel, uniform business rate, National Insurance.

So all of that has to be factored in.

Eddiec

Unlike me, these advisors are trusted to steer people in the right direction with probably the largest purchases they will ever make.

It must be really hard for them being forced to play by the rules.

Maybe they should choose a different career without having to go through all that hardship.....

magpiecottage

Actually, the advice was probably sound. RSA policies were, I think, monthly payment ones (which is considered the right way).

In 2000 the rules were that if you lost your earnings through illness or redundancy you would receive no state help for nine months.

By that time it was likely that the lender would have started proceedings to evict you and sell your home (this is not fanciful, I saw it happen).

So I suspect that, even if the complaint was investigated by FOS it would, it would not have been upheld.