Mis sold Equity Release...

prjohnsonnn10

Hi chaps - am on here looking for some advice.... my aunt appears to have got dragged into an Aviva scheme which ive taken a look at the background to and the financials that she is now 'stuck' with and am looking for any advice on a legal firm that i can talk to. She hasnt got a lot of funds spare now so would need to be a no win no fee outfit.

Ombudsman has looked at it and on face of it has simply said that '....the firm acted within the terms of the contract that she signed up to and therefore ' no case to answer' ....' !!

Would appreciate any advice on who to speak to next as i wish to push this all the way if possible

Thanks

Clive_Woody

How was this missold?

vlad

Was it mis-bought and not mis-sold? What has happened to the equity she released?

Nearlyold

If a complaint has already gone in to Aviva then FOS and FOS have said no case to answer (was this their final formal response?), I can't see any "no win no fee outfit" wanting to take your Aunt's case on unless you have a compelling reason for miss-sale that FOS have somehow missed.

jonesMUFCforever

Who gets the house after her demise?

prjohnsonnn10

their children. they werent in anyway fit to make the call on signing up for the scheme and undertsand the issues such as gilt indexing...!

both in thier late 60's .

they raised 30k, have paid back so far 45k and penalty to exit is 2ok

classic scheme sold to them in their living room by an aviva rep.

many others like it....

Clive_Woody

prjohnsonnn10 wrote: »

their children. they werent in anyway fit to make the call on signing up for the scheme and undertsand the issues such as gilt indexing...!

both in thier late 60's .

they raised 30k, have paid back so far 45k and penalty to exit is 2ok

classic scheme sold to them in their living room by an aviva rep.

many others like it....

I thought with equity release schemes you didn't pay anything back until after death when the estate is settled. Is your aunt making repayments now?

iolanthe07

My parents-in-law signed up to a really bad scheme (not Aviva) before these deals were properly regulated. On their death the insurance company took 95% of the value of their house, plus fees, which left the estate with less than £10,000 on a £200,000 house. All they received was £2000 a year for 15 years and a £10,000 lunp sum. A total of £40,000 received cost their estate around £190,000.

They was no comeback. They were mentally competent when they signed the papers, so.....tough. These schemes (scams?) take no account of the huge rise in house prices. I believe they are better regulted now.

burlington6

iolanthe07 wrote: »

My parents-in-law signed up to a really bad scheme (not Aviva) before these deals were properly regulated. On their death the insurance company took 95% of the value of their house, plus fees, which left the estate with less than £10,000 on a £200,000 house. All they received was £2000 a year for 15 years and a £10,000 lunp sum. A total of £40,000 received cost their estate around £190,000.

They was no comeback. They were mentally competent when they signed the papers, so.....tough. These schemes (scams?) take no account of the huge rise in house prices. I believe they are better regulted now.

They were happy to sign the paperwork though and happily spent the money they were given.

They are the ones at fault, not the company

You're just annoyed a larger share didn't come your way

magpiecottage

prjohnsonnn10 wrote: »

their children

This is irrelevant. The money tied up in the property belonged to the owner of the property, not her offspring, and she could do with it as she chose.

they werent in anyway fit to make the call on signing up for the scheme and undertsand the issues such as gilt indexing...!

If, by "they" you mean the children then as above.

If you mean the aunt, then FOS will have looked to see if the firm selling the plan ought to have recognised that the purchaser was not capable of making a proper decision. This is the case for any financial transaction.

The fact that the Ombudsman did not uphold the complaint on this point means either that the Ombudsman decided that the borrower WAS capable of making such a decision or that, if they were not, the adviser could not reasonably have been aware of it.

If you go here and search for DRN2074010 you will find a link to a case of this nature.

prjohnsonnn10 wrote: »

classic scheme sold to them in their living room by an aviva rep.

That begs the question "How would you know what might and might not have been said in your aunt's living room?"

The only way you could know for certain is if you were actually there and a party to the conversation.

And if that were so, the next question would be "Then why did you not speak up and say something at the time?"

Closely followed by "Why did you not provide your testimony in support of the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service?"


In addition, Aviva was a member of a scheme called Safe Home Income Plans (SHIP). It has now become the Equity Release Council and, as far as I am aware, Aviva remains a member.

One of SHIP's rules was that no mortgage of this type could be entered into unless the borrower took independent legal advice - and the solicitor had to sign to say that advice had been given.

So you have provided no evidence in support of your allegation but such evidence as is available to me points to it being untrue.

Incidentally, another feature of the Aviva plan is, as CliveWoody says, nothing is paid back until death (or the borrower goes into permanent care). So your aunt will not be thrown out of her home.

In addition, another SHIP rule is that all lifetime mortgages must have a "no negative-equity" guarantee.

iolanthe07

You're just annoyed a larger share didn't come your way

That's a very nasty and unwarranted comment. As it happens nothing came my way and I didn't expect any. The residue, quite rightly, went to their son.