Endowment update: payouts still falling

absolutebounder

toonfish wrote: »

I am astonished by your success rate, but where does the 94% come into it?

Perhaps he was mos sold his maths GCSE. Point of Interest. The sales man needed some limited FSA qualification What does the endowment claim expert need qualification wise.

toonfish

absolutebounder wrote: »

Perhaps he was mos sold his maths GCSE. Point of Interest. The sales man needed some limited FSA qualification What does the endowment claim expert need qualification wise.

From my limited experience he needs to be able to copy and paste from the Which website.

EdInvestor

Looks like the success rate with tied agent cases is 100%.

Not surprisingly.

vinno65

Mr_helpful wrote: »

To me the professional claimers are the worst. Just parasites making money jumping on the bandwagon of other peoples misery

Hurrah! well thats alright then problem solved!

Vinno

vinno65

absolutebounder wrote: »

Perhaps he was mos sold his maths GCSE. Point of Interest. The sales man needed some limited FSA qualification What does the endowment claim expert need qualification wise.

Not his english gcse like you were!

Vinno

mayb_2

When I was posting about my claim for the misselling of my With Profits policy, I think it was dunstonh and some of the other posters that said I would have had more chance of success if I had presented my case in a different way. Defenderoftheweak explained that the original sale had involved the churning of my pension. I did not know that I would have had a better case if I had concentrated on the issue of my pension requirements. The Ombudsman refused to see a connection between the closing of my pension and my taking out of the With Profits Policy - lthough it was proved (it was put in writing to the Ombudsman by the company concerned that their records showed this had happened at the same time). The salesman had filled in the fact find stating that no pension or other policy had been cancelled in the last three months - this was proved to be untrue but did not alter the Ombudsman's decision. Alterations had been made to the fact find as well and we did not realise the significance of these until it was to late.

If I had employed a claims company to pursue this for me they would have been able to put this forward in the proper way- they would have known how to do that. I was naieve enough to believe if I gave the facts these would speak for themselves - this was obviously not the case. If I could go back in time I would happily have paid a percentage of the settlement to win the case - instead I came away empty handed.

It sounds like a case of sour grapes to me, if posters are denigrating the services of people like defenderoftheweak. Presumably there are a lot of people out there who do not know how to deal with these things themselves, or there would not be any people posting on this site asking for advice. It would no doubt suit some people if they never got to the point of being able to make a claim. Nobody is forced to use a claims company, there is a way of pursuing your claim for yourself if you wish to do so - so why would anyone have a problem with that I wonder.

vinno65

toonfish wrote: »

From my limited experience he needs to be able to copy and paste from the Which website.

Precisely, hurrah have a £1!. Yes all miss-selling claims are bogus blah blah blah, jumping on the bandwagon blah blah blah, compensation culture blah blah blah. Only win because records weren't kept blah blah blah. Keep on chanting your mantra mate if it keeps you happy, but it's not my experience, nor that of hundreds of thousands of other "mug punters".

As I have mentioned to Dunston before most endowments were sold by tied agents in banks and building societies. It was here that miss-sales were widespread. Did you ever read the House of Commons report?

If you want to believe that hundreds of thousands if not millions of the British public are lying then go ahead, but if i had to choose between them and the financial services industry, with their track record of the last few years, then I know who I would believe.

Regards Vinno

EdInvestor

vinno65 wrote: »

If you want to believe that hundreds of thousands if not millions of the British public are lying then go ahead, but if i had to choose between them and the financial services industry, with their track record of the last few years, then I know who I would believe.

This is really very obvious IMHO.

toonfish

vinno65 wrote: »

Precisely, hurrah have a £1!. Yes all miss-selling claims are bogus blah blah blah, jumping on the bandwagon blah blah blah, compensation culture blah blah blah. Only win because records weren't kept blah blah blah. Keep on chanting your mantra mate if it keeps you happy, but it's not my experience, nor that of hundreds of thousands of other "mug punters".

As I have mentioned to Dunston before most endowments were sold by tied agents in banks and building societies. It was here that miss-sales were widespread. Did you ever read the House of Commons report?

If you want to believe that hundreds of thousands if not millions of the British public are lying then go ahead, but if i had to choose between them and the financial services industry, with their track record of the last few years, then I know who I would believe.

Regards Vinno

I know many are lying, they call in and ask how they should claim

mayb_2

"I know many are lying, they call in and ask how they should claim" :rotfl:

Gosh - well that proves it then doesn't it - nothing more to be said!

Please read my last post toonfish - and afterwards, if you are feeling really brave, you can call me a liar too.:mad: