Halifax TMPP reclaim, advice needed please

Trunks

Hello, please forgive the length of the post but all advice gratefully received

I bought a house in 2003 with a Halifax mortgage. First time buyer etc, bit nervous so took the advice of the assistant and took out the full TMPP, which included three separate elements- life cover, critical illness cover and mortgage repayment cover (MRC), with monthly payments. It was done and I didn't give it another thought until recently.

Fast forward ten years, married, still in same job, same house etc, wife now added to the same TMPP. Last month my wife starts suggesting reclaiming the PPI/MRC element of the policy as it may have originally been mis-sold due to the fact that my employer, a local authority, has always provided six months full sick pay followed by six months half pay, which would easily cover mortgage repayments, and I have worked there since before I took out the mortgage.

I filled in the FOS form from the Halifax website and sent it off with copies of all correspondence I had relating to the policy; my claim for mis-selling based on the fact that a diligent Halifax employee should have originally advised me, a nervous first time buyer, that the MRC was neither suitable nor necessary for me as soon as I told them that I worked for a local authority and received sick pay.

After about a week and a half I received a standard response letter from Halifax advising that they were gathering information and documentation etc.

Today I received a further letter from Halifax, now about 3 weeks after my original complaint, entitled 'Your Mortgage Payment Protection Insurance Annual Review', which is rather specifically asking me whether it still meets my needs and if it is the most suitable product for me. The letter then advises me what to do should I be either happy or unhappy with the product and cover. (This also seems to roll the three elements into one called Optional Payment Protection Insurance (Stand Alone)). This letter does not have a renewal date on, a date by which I have to commit myself to the product either way, which I thought a bit strange.

So... a couple of questions.

1 Is this sequence of letters normal and coincidental in the circumstances, or are they trying to catch me out as a result of my claim, ie if I persevere with the cover as it is, and don't cancel immediately, would that prejudice my claim for mis-selling? (I do intend to cancel the policy but haven't had time to sort out an IFA yet)

2 What are the chances of a successful claim for the mis-selling of the MRC, according to the above, and the experience of other claimants?

3 Any more advice re the above?

Many thanks for any help

dunstonh

Last month my wife starts suggesting reclaiming the PPI/MRC element of the policy as it may have originally been mis-sold due to the fact that my employer, a local authority, has always provided six months full sick pay followed by six months half pay, which would easily cover mortgage repayments, and I have worked there since before I took out the mortgage.

That reason works well with loan and credit card. However, less so with mortgage PPI as MPPI does pay out in addition to sickness benefits.

1 Is this sequence of letters normal and coincidental in the circumstances, or are they trying to catch me out as a result of my claim, ie if I persevere with the cover as it is, and don't cancel immediately, would that prejudice my claim for mis-selling? (I do intend to cancel the policy but haven't had time to sort out an IFA yet)

Its coincidence. The annual review letter is a new requirement and they can activate a time bar countdown from that point for future complaints.

2 What are the chances of a successful claim for the mis-selling of the MRC, according to the above, and the experience of other claimants?

Most MPPI complaints are rejected both by provider and the FOS. Halifax are a bit like most banks and can be scattergun in their responses. They used to auto payout on the MPPI element (but not life, CI or income protection). However, more recently they dont appear to be doing that any more unless the amount is low.

You dont have a particularly strong reason. It is one they could easily reject unless there are issues on file we cant see.

Trunks

Hello dunstonh

Many thanks for your considered reply. Just cross my fingers then, eh?!

[Deleted User]

Trunks wrote: »

Just cross my fingers then, eh?!

Just don't hold your breath while doing so!;)

elouise01582

My husband was advised by Halifax to take out TMPP in June 2000 and we still have all the documentation for the advice. It covers life, critical illness and redundancy and is decreasing term assurance. My husband did not need this policy as he worked for a large company that offered him 4 times death in service and also paid him for 6 months if he was ill. Therefore the only need he had was for the redundancy cover but no gap analysis was done so this was not explained. He was subsequently made redundant in 2006 and tried to claim however as he was going self-employed and not claiming jobseekers they would not pay out. We claimed against HBoS for this plan and two other PPI policies also held with them last May and were paid out immediately on the two PPI policies - a £2,300 refund. They also stated they were forwarding our TMPP misselling complaint to the relevant department. They never did and we have heard nothing since they stated they gad forwarded it on 8 June 2012. Three weeks ago we chased this up and again have had nothing from them in writing or by phone. We are now taking it to the FOS. The worst thing about the whole situation is that I made this claim whilst ill with post natal depression and now have to start all over again. I made a copy of all the documents - thank goodness as with them being over 6 years old HBoS will no longer have any copies. The department dealing with PPI claims at HBoS is completely at fault and when I phoned them (after getting my husband to give verbal authority) they gave me a defunct telephone number the first time and the 2nd gave me an internal Lloyds branch helpline. Basically, they deserve to pay the FOS fee for that alone. Now to find all those copies I made when ill around 11 months ago.

-taff

If you complained about this last May or June, and they sent a refusal, your 6 month time limit for taking it to the FOS is over anyway.
He was made redundant, which demonstrates he did need it, if he had signed on for JSA or the equivalent then, it would have paid out.If he was immune to critical illness or immortal then obviously, he wouldn't have needed it..

If you have all the documentation for the advice I suggest you read it again because unless you paid a single premium for any part of the MPPI, your complaint has failed.

Your complaint reasons would work with a Credit card or a Loan but these are short term insurances. A mortgage is long term and completely different.

dunstonh

My husband did not need this policy as he worked for a large company that offered him 4 times death in service and also paid him for 6 months if he was ill.

So it sounds like he did need it as he only had 4x death in service (which is way below most peoples needs) and only 6 months income if ill.

Therefore the only need he had was for the redundancy cover but no gap analysis was done so this was not explained.

I very much doubt that allegation. A gap analysis (or shorfall calculation as it is more commonly known) almost certainly took place as it was under advice process and that required it and they documented it.

He was subsequently made redundant in 2006 and tried to claim however as he was going self-employed and not claiming jobseekers they would not pay out.

Which is fair enough. It is to cover periods of unemployment. What you say suggests there was none.

Basically, they deserve to pay the FOS fee for that alone.

Given the weaknesses in your complaint, that is likely to be all that happens. (Based solely on what you have written).

elouise01582

We didn't ever receive any reply to the complaint made in April 2012 so the 6 month time bar won't apply. My husband was single with no dependents when he took out the policy so bearing in mind that the mortgage amount was £60,000 and the 4 x death in service equated to £80,000 why would he have required more than this?

elouise01582

The recommendation letter made no mention of my husband's cover through his employer so there is no evidence that they had any knowledge of it or asked the question as to whether he had any cover through his employment. Does this change the strength of the complaint?

dunstonh

so bearing in mind that the mortgage amount was £60,000 and the 4 x death in service equated to £80,000 why would he have required more than this?

Most families need around 10x income PLUS the amount of their debts. 4x death in service is way below that. Death in service goes some way to replace lost pension entitlement for spouse and lost income for a few years.

The recommendation letter made no mention of my husband's cover through his employer so there is no evidence that they had any knowledge of it or asked the question as to whether he had any cover through his employment. Does this change the strength of the complaint?

No it doesnt change it. Advisers are not required to consider employer death in service benefits for covering debts. it has another purpose as already mentioned. A full review would usually consider it for a wider analysis. However, mortgage advisers do not.

To give you an idea of the success rates on complaints about life assurance, the FOS only upheld 14% in the final quarter of last year. And 11% and 12% in the two quarters prior to that. Most people take out life assurance to cover their mortgage. You seem to putting forward a position that you think makes you different to the norm. To see success, you would need to show that you do not have a financial need for it. Unless you had more life assurance than the 4x death in service, then it is likely you had a financial need for it.

elouise01582

Oh I see - so they didn't have to look at what was already in place - even though my husband was living alone with no family and just wanted to ensure that should he die his mortgage was repaid they would not have taken the death in service into consideration. The extra £80,000 he would have received from the death in service would have passed to his estate presumably and to next of kin i.e. siblings, parents etc. Ah well - we'll have to wait to hear what they say once the FOS pass on the complaint. At least then they may deign to finally deal with the complaint - It will only have taken them over 12 months. Everything come to he who waits so they say. Thank you.