Miss sold life insurance

Annmarie1503

We don't have a suitability letter we either weren't give one or we have miss placed it, but all the information about are mortgage is in one place and we are careful about keeping all documents together.Would the bank keep such letter on file.Thanks for all your help.

vaio

dunstonh wrote: »

Virtually no chance.

You almost certainly have no evidence to support your allegation. So, that is easily rejected. They will then look at suitability of the product and if you had a need and you clearly did. (death in service is not generally considered suitable for mortgage provision).

If you have evidence then you may have scope. However, many mortgage advisers require the purchase of insurance to give free mortgage advice. That model is allowed. So, they can insist on insurance as long as you have a financial need for it.

Surely the question is (or should be) not whether it was a wise choice or whether "that model is allowed", it's to do with what the OP was told as part of the selling process.

If the OP was told

Annmarie1503 wrote: »

........we had to both take out life insurance in order to get the mortgage......

and

Annmarie1503 wrote: »

....we were also told by the advisor we had to take out ppi and terminal/ critical illness cover which was also incorrect.

then surely it's the standard advisor lies that has already resulted in mass payouts for endowments/ppi/swaps etc etc.

OP...if you feel you have been lied to/mis sold then lodge a complaint and escalate to the FOS if still unhappy

Annmarie1503

Thank you for all your help,I have just found all the paper work and the mortgage advisor had wrote down it was a requirement of our mortgage offer but the mortgage company has said it wasn't.Thanks again for everyone's help.

magpiecottage

dzug1 wrote: »

3 years pay not very much??

I have gone back to my old Pension Review records.

Lump sum of TWICE PENSIONABLE salary.

That is not the same as 3 year's pay for two reasons.

2 is clearly not the same as 3 but also what you are paid is not necessarily the same as pensionable salary.

In any case, cover provided by an employer is generally considered unsuitable for a mortgage as it is only payable at the discretion of the pension scheme trustees and will cease on termination of employment.

vaio

does unsuitability translate into advisers being able to say the mortgage is conditional on taking the insurance when that isn't the case?

kingstreet

No, but FOS will rely on what is written down, not what was said, so the OP really needs to obtain and read the suitability report to establish the advisor's reasons for recommending such cover.

Once they have done that, they make a complaint to the advisor firm, explaining why the recommendation did not meet their needs.

If the final outcome from the advisor firm isn't acceptable, the complaint can then be escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

dunstonh

Verbal allegations rarely succeed. Anyone can claim anything was said. Documentation is key. Where a complaint is made on an unprovable allegation, that point is usually rejected but then the suitability of the product is then looked at instead. The OP does appear to have had a financial need for life assurance (mortgage, children and only 2 or 3 times death in service).

If there was documentation that said it was needed by the lender and it wasnt then that could be grounds for complaint. However, if the adviser said there was a financial need for the policy then that would not be grounds for complaint. The word need and the context used is key. Financial need is not the same as lender needing it.

vaio

looks like the OP is on nice solid ground then......

Annmarie1503 wrote: »

Thank you for all your help,I have just found all the paper work and the mortgage advisor had wrote down it was a requirement of our mortgage offer but the mortgage company has said it wasn't.........

dunstonh

vaio wrote: »

looks like the OP is on nice solid ground then......

Not necessarily. Context is important. For example, if the report says you need life assurance to cover the mortgage, then that is acceptable. It isnt saying the lender requires it as a condition of the mortgage.

If it says that it is a condition of the mortgage you have life assurance then it is a stronger complaint. However, still not guaranteed. For example, if the adviser says that was a typing error on a template and the rest of the file points to a shortfall analysis and an event that would typically be expected to have life assurance one (such as a new mortgage) then the FOS may accept it was a mistake and then revert to looking at whether it was suitable or not.

vaio

I think the context is pretty clear, whilst the OP would no doubt have been happy to get *optional* recommendations from the advisor on the pro & cons of various products, they rightly object to being told that they *had* to take out life/ppi/CI cover as a condition of their mortgage offer when that just wasn't the case.

Annmarie1503 wrote: »

........We were told we had to both take out life insurance in order to get the mortgage......

Annmarie1503 wrote: »

........we where also told by the advisor we had to take out ppi and terminal/ critical illness cover which was also incorrect.

Annmarie1503 wrote: »

........I have just found all the paper work and the mortgage advisor had wrote down it was a requirement of our mortgage offer but the mortgage company has said it wasn't............

OP.....If I were you then I'd certainly lodge a complaint and if you are still unhappy then escalate to the FOS. Apart from your time neither will cost you anything.

The only problem you have is that the financial services indusrty is so mired in assorted mis-selling scams that the poor old FOS are creaking at the seams and to get your case looked at by them takes months rather than weeks.