Very old PPI claim

Behamy

In 1986, as a single woman, I took out a mortgage on a small house with NatWest. At the time I was told I had to have an insurance policy for the mortgage. I argued that I could not see the point of the policy but in the end I was told 'no policy, no mortgage' (I remember this because I was so cross). I had the mortgage until 1991, when I sold the house.

I have no paperwork concerning this transaction and I am not even sure which branch of Nat West sold me the policy (could have been one of a few of branches).

I've had a search of the forums regarding PPI and the claims don't seem to be this ancient. Do you think it is worth the time to take this further? Has anyone experienced such an old claim being successful?

Thank you

antrobus

Behamy wrote: »

In 1986, as a single woman, I took out a mortgage on a small house with NatWest. At the time I was told I had to have an insurance policy for the mortgage. I argued that I could not see the point of the policy but in the end I was told 'no policy, no mortgage' (I remember this because I was so cross). I had the mortgage until 1991, when I sold the house.....

What kind of insurance policy?

In 1986 it would have been quite common for a borrower to have been required to pay for a life insurance policy, or a mortgage indemnity guarantee when taking out a mortgage. None of which would be PPI, or give you grounds for a complaint.

Behamy wrote: »

...I have no paperwork concerning this transaction and I am not even sure which branch of Nat West sold me the policy (could have been one of a few of branches).

I've had a search of the forums regarding PPI and the claims don't seem to be this ancient. Do you think it is worth the time to take this further? Has anyone experienced such an old claim being successful?....

Nat West has centralised records. Which branch it was doesn't matter. If you have no paperwork, then you are going to have to speak to Nat West to see whether they have any records of what happened in 1986 to establish what it was you were sold in the first place.

dunstonh

I took out a mortgage on a small house with NatWest. At the time I was told I had to have an insurance policy for the mortgage. I argued that I could not see the point of the policy but in the end I was told 'no policy, no mortgage' (I remember this because I was so cross). I had the mortgage until 1991, when I sold the house.

In the 80s, it was normal for banks to insist on life assurance as a mandatory requirement. Is it life assurance that you were told to have?

If so, then nothing wrong with that. They can insist on whatever they like as a condition of borrowing.

I've had a search of the forums regarding PPI and the claims don't seem to be this ancient. Do you think it is worth the time to take this further? Has anyone experienced such an old claim being successful?

In 1986, it is unlikely to PPI. It will either be life assurance or MIG. Neither of which are PPI and nothing wrong with them forcing you to have it.

[Deleted User]

Unless you still bank with them, I very much doubt NatWest will have any record of finance taken out three decades ago. As the others have said, it's not going to be PPI anyway and your "complaint" that you were forced to buy the insurance is not valid since it's probable that the policy WAS compulsory.

sun73

If it was life insurance/assurance could it not be considered as mis-sold on the grounds the OP being a single applicant with no dependants at the point of sale?


If NatWest cannot locate any details for the old mortgage account, the only other way you could try to trace the reference number is by applying online at Land Registry to request the property title number, costs £3.00.


Download Form OC2, ask for title and charge documents, send a cheque for £7.00. It takes about 10 days and if they find the mortgage charge document it might show the NatWest account number but not if it included an insurance policy.

[Deleted User]

sun73 wrote: »

If it was life insurance/assurance could it not be considered as mis-sold on the grounds the OP being a single applicant with no dependants at the point of sale?

Not if it was compulsory for EVERY mortgage applicant regardless of their circumstance.

This is one "complaint" really not worth pursuing even if there are still accessible records..

dunstonh

If it was life insurance/assurance could it not be considered as mis-sold on the grounds the OP being a single applicant with no dependants at the point of sale?

No. Back then (and until around the late 90s) banks insisted on life assurance as a condition of borrowing to mostly protect themselves. i.e. they knew that in the event of death, the funds would be available to clear the debt. Insurance as a condition of borrowing is still allowed today. Although you only tend to see if on the commercial borrowing side.

If NatWest cannot locate any details for the old mortgage account, the only other way you could try to trace the reference number is by applying online at Land Registry to request the property title number, costs £3.00.

If it is life assurance, then it will not appear on any mortgage documentation as it would have been a standalone product. Given the year, it pre-dates finance services regulation. Plus, it would probably not been with the lender's own provider (as polarisation didnt happen until 1988). Insurance details are unlikely to appear on Land Registry.

We are assuming the OP means life assurance given the year but it could easily be MIG. We need the OP to come back and confirm which it is (life assurance being monthly standalone regular premium whereas MIG as was a single amount, typically added to the debt or paid up front).

[Deleted User]

dunstonh wrote: »

We need the OP to come back and confirm which it is (life assurance being monthly standalone regular premium whereas MIG as was a single amount, typically added to the debt or paid up front).

I doubt Behamy knows herself after thirty years…