PPI Claim

RRS

Just filled the relevant form but haven't sent it yet, need some advice befor I do.

In 1997 wife and I took out a mortgage with Barclays which included 'Endowment Policy including Critical Illness'. The grounds for my claim are:

• We never asked for critical illness cover
• It was presented to us as part of the Endowmwnt plan
• Never realised it was a seperate product till patyments started going out of account.
• Had no sick pay at that time but had savings of circa £5000 (can't prove now that we did)
• Changed job within a year and moved on to more stable jobs with sick pay and other benefits.
• Seller told us that buying extra products would enhance our chances for securing a mortgage (1st time buyers)
• Advisor was not independant
• Sold us a rubbish endowment policy as well at the time telling us that "this was the thing to do."
• Endowment promised shortfall from the first year.
• We never specifically asked for critical illness cover
• Had to discontinue both the products after 4 years.

Do we have a case here?

Thanks in advance.

dunstonh

PPI Claim

THis has nothing to do with PPI.

Do we have a case here?

on paper, No. Although we dont have the benefit of the audit trail to really say.

We never asked for critical illness cover

yes you did. You signed the forms.

It was presented to us as part of the Endowmwnt plan

It is a part of the endowment so nothing wrong with that.

Never realised it was a seperate product till patyments started going out of account.

Is it a separate product? You make reference to the endowment but if it has its own policy number then its not linked to the endowment.

Had no sick pay at that time but had savings of circa £5000 (can't prove now that we did)

So, you had only limited savings and therefore had a financial need for the policy. That one statement can easily blow your complaint our of the water.

Changed job within a year and moved on to more stable jobs with sick pay and other benefits.

employer benefits have no overlap with CI cover. So, that isnt a problem. Plus its a future event. Not known about at the point of sale.

Seller told us that buying extra products would enhance our chances for securing a mortgage (1st time buyers)

A lot of people claim that. However, it is extremely rare for there to be any evidence to back up that allegation and you normally find that reason is rejected.

Advisor was not independant

not a complaint reason.

Sold us a rubbish endowment policy as well at the time telling us that "this was the thing to do."

What has that got to do with your complaint about the CI policy?

Endowment promised shortfall from the first year.

The endowment didnt promise anything. However, the example projections would be expected to show a shortfall on mid rate or a lower rate due to they way they work.

We never specifically asked for critical illness cover

You already said that. prove it when your signatures say you did. The shortfall analysis shows you needed it and the report explains that.

Had to discontinue both the products after 4 years.

What has that got to do with the sale.

Do we have a case here?

Most of your complaint reasons are not valid complaint reasons. One actually supports the sale of the CI. It is also hard to see what you are complaining about. You say PPI but there is no PPI. You say CI indicating it is standalone but then go on about the endowment. you are muddying the waters.

However, in respect of the CI policy, nothing you had said shows you had no financial need for it and that is the usual way these complaints end up being looked at.

RRS

Thanks for your comprehensive reply. I made an inquiry and it shows 'Account PPI Flag' against "Mortgage" which stayed for over 3 years. I was presuming it was the Critical Illness Cover that was sold to me as part of the endowment policy. If this is not that CI cover than it must be something else that I have totally forgotten about or maybe never knew about. How should I proceed if this positive 'Account PPI Flag' points to something other than the CI cover that I don't even know about? Are you sure that the PPI and Critical Illness Cover are two different things?

Thanks in advance.

[Deleted User]

RRS wrote: »

Are you sure that the PPI and Critical Illness Cover are two different things?

Absolutely and categorically.
PPI covers unemployment (through redundancy).
Critical Illness is insurance against (guess what?) critical illness.

dunstonh

Are you sure that the PPI and Critical Illness Cover are two different things?

PPI and CI are very different products. Even issued by different types of insurance companies (PPI is issued by general insurance companies and CI is issued by life and pension companies - some companies have both arms) Its a bit like asking if a motorbike is a helicopter.

RRS

Well, we were both in full time permanent jobs at the time. It means that the PPI was not needed. I was aware of the Critical Illness cover sold to me alongside endowment, I was never aware of an unemployment cover (PPI). Do I have a case now?

[Deleted User]

RRS wrote: »

Well, we were both in full time permanent jobs at the time. It means that the PPI was not needed.

This indicates the exact opposite, I'm afraid.

You could only say you didn't need the PPI if you were somehow immune to redundancy, already unemployed or retired. You've also already stated that you had limited savings at the time..

RRS wrote: »

was aware of the Critical Illness cover sold to me alongside endowment, I was never aware of an unemployment cover (PPI).

It's not a valid mis-selling complaint simply because you say you are were "unaware" of the features of the Endowment policy. Just because you failed to check what you were signing for (or more likely simply don't remember 17 years on) it's not any cause for complaint.

RRS wrote: »

Do I have a case now?

Nothing you have said indicates any wrong-doing by the Bank. Your "complaint" is utterly weak and relies purely on the Bank finding other errors with the sale as part of their investigation..

It's not somehow "wrong" to have PPI, the policy has to have been mis-sold to you in order to be refunded.

dunstonh

Well, we were both in full time permanent jobs at the time. It means that the PPI was not needed.

1) That actually makes you suitable for PPI.
2) You dont have PPI. You have CI.

I was never aware of an unemployment cover (PPI). Do I have a case now?

First thing to clarify is whether you had it or not as in post 1 you didnt mention you had PPI. Now you indicate you did.

[Deleted User]

RRS wrote: »

. How should I proceed if this positive 'Account PPI Flag' points to something other than the CI cover

Where are you seeing this "positive account PPI flag"?

It is not somehow wrong to have payment protection insurance any more than it's wrong to have critical illness or home contents insurance.
If you have valid and (preferably) verifiable complaint reasons then you can complain. Your problem is that, seventeen years on, you don't appear to have any complaint reasons other than you've forgotten you had the insurance!

dunstonh wrote: »

First thing to clarify is whether you had it or not as in post 1 you didnt mention you had PPI. Now you indicate you did.

Post #3 has already cleared up the confusion.

dunstonh

Post #3 has already cleared up the confusion.

Doesnt necessarily mean he has PPI. After all, there would be a monthly d/d to the MPPI if it existed. yet no mention of that. Just the CI and endowment.

RRS

Thanks for all the replies.

I think I should ask the bank to investigate this PPI and if they find anything wrong with it then they should proceed accordingly otherwise I will forget about it. Is this the right course? I am sure I did not need a PPI in addition to the life cover and CI cover that came with my endowment policy.