Missold savings plan?

Frances38

Hi just looking for some advice so bear with me.

In 1992 I asked a financial advisor to advise me regarding a savings plan for my baby daughter to provide for her if she went to university. He recommended a friends provident versatile savings plan and that it should be in my name. When she was got accepted to uni I enquired about the money and was told it was 25 year policy! And it was life assurance for me.

I think I was missold as I wanted an 18 year savings plan and I did not need life insurance , I have been employed in the same job since 1990 and have a generous life cover with my employer. In addition I am married and my husband earns substantially more than me we also have joint life cover on our mortgage.
Do you think I have a valid claim for misspelling?

Thanks for your comments.

McKneff

Did you read what you were signing..............

It would have all been there

rs65

Frances38 wrote: »

Do you think I have a valid claim for misspelling?

Quality

dunstonh

Do you think I have a valid claim for misspelling?

note to self. Check spelling more thoroughly on reports.

In respect of the complaint, it would depend on what evidence you have to support your allegation that you thought you had an endowment when you in reality you say you ended up with a pure term assurance with no investment element. (I am assuming you ended up with a pure term assurance and not an endowment as it isnt clear what you ended up with. An endowment policy is both a savings plan and a life assurance as it falls under life assurance taxation and in 1992 was the most common form of savings plan for people)

opinions4u

Frances38 wrote: »

In 1992 I asked a financial advisor to advise me regarding a savings plan for my baby daughter to provide for her if she went to university. He recommended a friends provident versatile savings plan and that it should be in my name. When she was got accepted to uni I enquired about the money and was told it was 25 year policy! And it was life assurance for me.

In what way is the plan versatile? Does it allow you access to your money now?

I think I was missold as I wanted an 18 year savings plan and I did not need life insurance , I have been employed in the same job since 1990 and have a generous life cover with my employer. In addition I am married and my husband earns substantially more than me we also have joint life cover on our mortgage.
Do you think I have a valid claim for misspelling?

I can see the need for life cover. You wanted to provide additional funds by saving for a university education. Clearing the mortgage with one policy is all well and good, but that is unlikely to free up enough to replace an income.

Employee benefits are all well and good. But most people change employers.

So providing an additional lump sum for university education in the case of death seems sensible, as if you'd died before she got to university your savings would be of a lower amount.

So any complaint is around the term of the savings plan. But, if the policy allows withdrawals without penalty, then the plan is likely to have been suitable. If it doesn't, then I'd suggest you complain.

Frances38

Thanks for all your responses and apologies for the spelling mistake.

The policy I have I now realise has an element of life assurance as well as the investment element, is this similar to an endowment?

My complaint is that I did not ask for or need life cover, we had significant savings at the time and adequate life cover. I am a civil servant and have only had one employer and as sad as it may seem, I joined the civil service because of the benefits including life cover.

I also came across the notes of the meeting with the advisor and this states that I didn't want life cover and the purpose of the meeting was for savings for my daughter.

My thoughts are that I was missold the life cover element and that all my money should have been directed towards savings as I requested. I know the paperwork would have had the details included but I was very young and unfortunately trusted the advisor, this was a big mistake - he also missold a pension to my husband which the company concerned alerted us to.

Given this extra detail, do we have a case for misselling?

Thanks

dunstonh

My complaint is that I did not ask for or need life cover, we had significant savings at the time and adequate life cover.

These plans were the normal way of doing it prior to the introduction of PEPs and later ISAs.

I am a civil servant and have only had one employer and as sad as it may seem, I joined the civil service because of the benefits including life cover.

Your employment status has no impact on the need for life assurance other than a need to ensure your spouse/children are looked after in the event of death. Death in service provided by an employer is not at all adequate for most people (max 4x DIS is woefully short)

Dont mix up the life assurance tax wrapper for investments with life assurance used for personal protection.

Given this extra detail, do we have a case for misselling?

For 1992 no. These products were the stable long term regular contribution plan of their time. They went obsolete around 1995-97 when PEPs became mainstream.

Frances38

Thanks for your reply, I suppose it was a product for it's time. At a recent review by a financial advisor they actually laughed when they saw we were still paying this which was a bit embarrassing!

I am going to enquire about cashing this in now as my daughter wants to do a masters degree!! Hopefully there won't be any penalties. What do you think?

Frances38

Just thought I would update this. I lodged a complaint with the company and received a letter today stating that the complaint was upheld. The company accepted that the term of the policy was not suitable to my specific requests and assessed need. Also that it included a life assurance policy which I had not requested.

They have offered to refund my premiums and damages which equates to an enhanced surrender value. The damages have been calculated using the Bank of England rate plus 1percent.

Can anyone advice if this is the standard calculation.

Thanks

magpiecottage

Frances38 wrote: »

Do you think I have a valid claim for misspelling?

Assuming you meant "misselling" then certainly!

Frances38 wrote: »

They have offered to refund my premiums and damages which equates to an enhanced surrender value. The damages have been calculated using the Bank of England rate plus 1percent.

Can anyone advice if this is the standard calculation.

That is a standard format for redress.

Actually, there is merit in an endowment for this purpose. The point is that if you died and thus could not continue investing each month a lump sum would pay out instead.

However, the term was wrong and that would seem to be the reason for upholding.

CKhalvashi

Frances38 wrote: »

Just thought I would update this. I lodged a complaint with the company and received a letter today stating that the complaint was upheld. The company accepted that the term of the policy was not suitable to my specific requests and assessed need. Also that it included a life assurance policy which I had not requested.

They have offered to refund my premiums and damages which equates to an enhanced surrender value. The damages have been calculated using the Bank of England rate plus 1percent.

Can anyone advice if this is the standard calculation.

Thanks

Standard is 8.5%

CK