Endowmwnt and divorce

jordans_gran

Can anyone help
I am in the process of going through a divorce and we have a endowment started in april 1988 and finishes in april 2008 from jan 06 my ex has not contributed to the monthly payments saying he is not paying this anymore in may 06 I obtained a surrender value of just over £24k in the finalcial package i have £12k as his share. He now wants to pay the difference and continue until the finish which will be approx £30k can he force me to do this Its still in both party names but paid from my bank acc.

peterbaker

jordans gran

Try not to fight over who has been paying for it lately. It is probably irrelevant. Apart from the first 4 years perhaps, it will always have had a surrender value and in actual fact that value probably hasn't increased much in recent years.

Endowments like this are significant joint marital assets. All ours were in my name and paid from my bank account right from the outset and the total surrender values AND "mis-selling" compensation (read on) were a good £50K when we settled our divorce.

That £50K went straight into the joint marital assets pot I didn't blink, nor should I have done.

Rather than directing your wrath at your ex's plan's, have you directed any wrath against the company that sold the endowment? I take it that it may originally have been bought to assist house purchase? It is quite likely it was supposed to yield far more than it will do as a surrender or if you let it run.

I suggest you explore the compensation angle together (oh dear ... well one of you then!) before you get back to the negotiating table and decide what the asset is worth.

Once you are satisfied you have half of todays value, INCLUDING any easily obtained compensation, then there is no reason why you shouldn't then calculate the difference, sign over all rights to him and let him do what the hell he likes with it.
Have you made any compensation claim? Look elsewhere in MSE for advice on this. It is very simple to claim. If you haven't already done this, you may be leaving thousands of pounds on the table.

Peter

Edit: - you could do a proper deal with your ex. You want the £12,000 now please, rather than wait a year. But you could just as well borrow it for a year from a bank or on cheap credit cards at say 6%, thats £720 interest. So you'll let your ex handle any compensation claim and run the policy to maturity, but then you would like your half of any compensation and the difference on maturity with an adjustment for the continuing premiums and the notional £720 interest.

He'll argue and say well who's going to do all the work? And you can settle for an overall deduction of a grand or £1,250, get your £12,000 from him now, and sit back and wait for one or two little windfalls later:-)

toonfish

peterbaker wrote: »

jordans gran

Try not to fight over who has been paying for it lately. It is probably irrelevant. Apart from the first 4 years perhaps, it will always have had a surrender value and in actual fact that value probably hasn't increased much in recent years.

Endowments like this are significant joint marital assets. All ours were in my name and paid from my bank account right from the outset and the total surrender values AND "mis-selling" compensation (read on) were a good £50K when we settled our divorce.

That £50K went straight into the joint marital assets pot I didn't blink, nor should I have done.

Rather than directing your wrath at your ex's plan's, have you directed any wrath against the company that sold the endowment? I take it that it may originally have been bought to assist house purchase? It is quite likely it was supposed to yield far more than it will do as a surrender or if you let it run.

I suggest you explore the compensation angle together (oh dear ... well one of you then!) before you get back to the negotiating table and decide what the asset is worth.

Once you are satisfied you have half of todays value, INCLUDING any easily obtained compensation, then there is no reason why you shouldn't then calculate the difference, sign over all rights to him and let him do what the hell he likes with it.
Have you made any compensation claim? Look elsewhere in MSE for advice on this. It is very simple to claim. If you haven't already done this, you may be leaving thousands of pounds on the table.

Peter

Compensation for what exactly?

You are making assumptions without foundation.

peterbaker

toonfish wrote: »

Compensation for what exactly?

You are making assumptions without foundation.

Don't be silly "Mortgage Advisor" - I probably knew what a low cost endowment policy was before you were born.

toonfish

peterbaker wrote: »

Don't be silly "Mortgage Advisor" - I probably knew what a low cost endowment policy was before you were born.

Maybe, but how do you know this is a low cost endowment, was for a mortgage, is underperforming, the value "hasn't increased much in recent years", was supposed to "yield more than it has done", or that it was mis-sold. All of these may be true, but you or I don't know.

I reckon the silly one would be trying to offer "advice" without any understanding of the facts of the case. No, you just jump in with the "claim compensation" crap.

peterbaker

toonfish wrote: »

Maybe, but how do you know this is a low cost endowment, was for a mortgage, is underperforming, the value "hasn't increased much in recent years", was supposed to "yield more than it has done", or that it was mis-sold. All of these may be true, but you or I don't know.

I reckon the silly one would be trying to offer "advice" without any understanding of the facts of the case. No, you just jump in with the "claim compensation" crap.

Well the OP can find out can't she? I am not offering advice. I am not a financial adviser just a man of the world who knows what a disgrace the endowment scandal has been for the whole industry and isn't afraid to say it, and someone not swayed by any snivelling poster who says what I say is cr*p.

I have not said any of these things were absolutes, but it would be doing the OP a disservice not to remind her what could so easily be.

Mr_helpful

Im lost here How can anyone say this was miss sold from what the OP wrote. Stirring up all these false compensation claims I believe sabotages the genuine ones. The Op's question is about her partner not whether the endowment was miss sold.

peterbaker

Mr_helpful wrote: »

Im lost here How can anyone say this was miss sold from what the OP wrote. Stirring up all these false compensation claims I believe sabotages the genuine ones. The Op's question is about her partner not whether the endowment was miss sold.

Mr helpful are you trying to steer the OP off the scent of possible multi-thousand pound compensation and to allow her ex to possibly have the benefit of it??

True we don't have the details so because you and toonfish have declared your flag as Mortgage Advisors you have to be circumspect about offering detailed advice. You might also feel that you owe some loyalty to the hands that feed you.

On the other hand I can just give the benefit of my very valid recent experience.

My "youngest endowment" incepted in 1987 so is only a year older than the OPs. It's surrender value was also about twenty odd grand. It's maturity value was supposed to be £50,000. Some chance!

I settled my divorce 2 years ago and it included a prior agreement and distribution of endowment monies and compensation and decisions about whether to let them run or not.

And, as I already said, I was a successful pathfinder claimant (the 1987 date should give you a clue about that) and I know the industry well enough thanks.

Do you have anything more pertinent to offer?

Mr_helpful

No Im not steering her question anywhere. She didnt ask whether she should have claimed for a miss sale or not. Lack of performance is not grounds for miss sale anyway.
If the OPs partner pays her for his share of the premiums i cant see the problem really, However if he doesnt then he should only get a proportion but as its a joint policy the cheque will come in joint names anyway.

peterbaker

Mr_helpful wrote: »

She didnt ask whether she should have claimed for a miss sale or not.

Exactly, that's why I introduced it.

Lack of performance is not grounds for miss sale anyway.

Yeah right. So the industry keeps saying. So we just have to agree on calling it something else. Funny how the industry pays up through the nose in the end though, eh?

If the OPs partner pays her for his share of the premiums i cant see the problem really. However if he doesnt then he should only get a proportion

Ehm now you are giving advice about distribution of marital assets following divorce and I think you just got it wrong, Mr. Mortgage Adviser! (If you are suggesting that the assumed 50/50 start point if there are no kids should be significantly adjusted based on whose account has paid the premiums).

Have you got divorced lately?

...but as its a joint policy the cheque will come in joint names anyway.

...if they do nothing about re-assigning it first, then yes.

BTW, Are there kids involved, jordans gran? Your name in MSE would tend to suggest they are grown and flown, but just checking:-)

Mr_helpful

peterbaker wrote: »

Exactly, that's why I introduced it.

So you introduce questions on behalf of the OP do you Perhaps seh would like to know what the weather is like here but you didnt ask that did you.

Yeah right. So the industry keeps saying. So we just have to agree on calling it something else. Funny how the industry pays up through the nose in the end though, eh?

FSA is responsible for that one. Industry often has to pay up because people have been told what to say. I have often been asked what a client should say to get compensation.

Ehm now you are giving advice about distribution of marital assets following divorce and I think you just got it wrong, Mr. Mortgage Adviser! (If you are suggesting that the assumed 50/50 start point if there are no kids should be significantly adjusted based on whose account has paid the premiums).

I gave no advice what so ever.

Have you got divorced lately?

Yes thanks

...if they do nothing about re-assigning it first, then yes.

I get the impression the op would like an answer to her question. If she had a different question dont you think she would have asked it:rolleyes: