Is this a valid PPI claim?

dickysparks

In the 1980s, I had a mortgage with Barclays, arranged through Lloyds Bank, with a life cover arranged by Scottish Amicable. As I was self-employed, I was told that I needed to take up the cover arranged by Scots Amicable, as this included payment protection should I fall ill or become un-employed and I was told that this was a precondition to getting the mortgage. Underhanded mis-selling?

So, do I have a claim against Scottish Amicable, now part of the Pru, or Lloyds Bank as they were the intervening link? Or nobody?

I did subsequently find out that the whole scheme was hookum when I tried to claim on the policy in the 1990s recession.

I've read through much of the information on this site on PPI but although its very clear about credit & loans, it does seem vague about other forms of mis-selling. Or am I looking in the wrong place?

dunstonh

In the 1980s, I had a mortgage with Barclays, arranged through Lloyds Bank, with a life cover arranged by Scottish Amicable.

So, that would have used their brokerage service. Meaning that regulation did not apply at the time.

Plus Scottish Amicable is a life assurance company. Not a general insurance company. So, that would have been life assurance.

I was told that I needed to take up the cover arranged by Scots Amicable, as this included payment protection should I fall ill or become un-employed and I was told that this was a precondition to getting the mortgage. Underhanded mis-selling?

You would have been told you needed life assurance as that was mandatory with the banks back then. And as Scot Am were a life assurance company, that would make sense. Life assurance is not PPI.

So, do I have a claim against Scottish Amicable, now part of the Pru, or Lloyds Bank as they were the intervening link? Or nobody?

Nobody.

its pre-regulation by 20-25 years. You appear to have the wrong product type for the complaint and there appears to be no wrongdoing as mandatory life assurance was allowed.

I did subsequently find out that the whole scheme was hookum when I tried to claim on the policy in the 1990s recession.

Which makes sense as a life insurance company would not cover you for unemployment as that comes under general insurance company products.

[Deleted User]

dickysparks wrote: »

I did subsequently find out that the whole scheme was hookum when I tried to claim on the policy in the 1990s recession.

Since you could realistically claim on Life Assurance only if you had died, it's hardly surprising your "claim" was rejected. This would surely have been fully explained to you in their letter rejecting that claim, albeit decades ago so understandable that you've forgotten.

Don't waste any more time with this..

dickysparks

Okay, thanks for your replies.

Maybe I did not make it clear enough but within the life cover provided by Scots Amicable, there was a section that would cover me in the event of sickness & unemployment. This was sold to me as an 'insurance' against unexpected circumstances providing I was still breathing & NOT dead.

As I previously stated, when I invoked this clause, I was given short shrift & not the support I had supposedly been paying for, although it had been sold to me on that premise.

dunstonh

Maybe I did not make it clear enough but within the life cover provided by Scots Amicable, there was a section that would cover me in the event of sickness & unemployment. This was sold to me as an 'insurance' against unexpected circumstances providing I was still breathing & NOT dead.

Multi-segment plans did not exist back in the 80s.
Could it have been waiver of premium? That was one of two types of addon that do exist on a life assurance (the other being critical illness cover). Waiver of premium pays out if you are unable to work due to accident/sickness. it does not cover redundancy. That is not PPI though. Critical illness cover is not PPI and not even close. An 80s plan could have had terminal illness cover as an addon back then. They are automatically included nowadays but were not back then. However, again, that is not PPI.

[Deleted User]

As I said, don't waste any more time with this.