Critical illness insurance mis-sold

HelpWhereIcan

stephenni1971 wrote: »

Did you have a mortgage when you took it out?

I only ask because a WOL policy wouldn't normally be recommended to cover a mortgage need - it's complete over kill as your mortgage debt reduces over time and normally finishes before retirement. WOL is a rare enough beast for exactly the reasons you have given -

If however it was advised as a stand alone product though as others have said I fear you wont have much grounds for complaint.

I would agree with this completely.

While Dunstonh makes a fair comment about the quality of cover available being a consideration, I believe the OP was about a plan taken around 10 years ago.

At one time a WoL plan was the main way to get CI but not 10 years ago - there were 'Comprehensive' term plans available at that time with decent CI cover and no investment element.

In most cases there would be no reason (now or 10 years ago) to use a Whole of Life plan with an investment element to cover a repayment mortgage.

If you took the plan to cover a repayment mortgage your grounds for complaint would mainly be the mis match between the term and cover provided by the plan and the mortgage (as pointed out by stephenni1971).

You would also have the argument that the 10 year review would pose more risk than a straightforward mortgage protection plan with Critical Illness. Unless this risk was explained to you with a comparison made to using a term plan there is every chance FOS would find in your favour - especially if you had no previous investment experience.

Was something I saw recommended to a client about 12 years ago by an adviser I was in competition with. I pointed out the decreasing term plan I was recommending covered more for Critical Illness at a lower cost.

I also explained the investment risk of the WoL plan and the 10 year review. That person is still a client of mine.

I remember discussing the case with a manager of mine at the time as we had a maximum cover WoL plan that I could have offered but we came to the opinion that the client had no need for it... a point I make to show that it was not standard practice or acceptable at the time let alone now (but it was common).

However, if part of your discussion was about a need to provide cover over and above the mortgage, with the option for it to continue 'indefinately' and you wanted as much cover as possible for the short term knowing premiums would rise and/or cover would fall etc you may have problems with a complaint.