Mortgage PPI

Judith_Rowlands

I am new to the Forum and hope I am posting in the right place...
In the mid to late 1990s I had a mortgage with Abbey National/Santander who sold me and my husband a PPI policy which was underwritten on behalf of the bank by an insurance company (possibly Commercial Union).
Because of a back injury, my husband had to claim on the policy and they did pay out. Unfortunately, because the adviser in Abbey National advised us we had to take out the PPI policy which only covered our mortgage payment and nothing else; we experienced financial difficulties as we were unable to claim any benefits (income support/supplementary benefit) as we were a couple of pounds over what we were entitled to earn purely because of the income replacement money we were receiving to cover our mortgage payments. Back then had we not had this policy we would have qualified for significant financial assistance.
Do you think on these grounds, even though we claimed on the policy it would qualify as a mis-sold product? (Income replacement policies were r'elatively new and 'the in thing' at the time) Thank you.

dunstonh

Do you think on these grounds, even though we claimed on the policy it would qualify as a mis-sold product?

Clearly it was not a mis-sold product as your claimed on the policy and it paid out. It proves you were eligible to claim, you knew about it and you had a financial need.

(Income replacement policies were r'elatively new and 'the in thing' at the time)

No they were not. Proper income protection was around long before that.

Back then had we not had this policy we would have qualified for significant financial assistance.

No you wouldnt. The MPPI did not prevent benefits being paid and the lack of MPPi did not increase the benefits being paid. In 1995 (as it is different today), borrowers did not receive benefits for the first nine months of their income support claim in respect of the mortgage. As MPPI was used to offset the mortgage payment, it was not included as a source of income in benefit claims. However, income protection that was not for a mortgage was included as a source of income for benefit claims. So, actually what you say you should have had would have reduced the benefits you were able to claim whereas what you had did not.

You appear to be saying that as you didnt buy further insurances to cover you that it makes the policy(ies) you did buy unsuitable. However, that is not the case.

Income protection (generically known as permanent health insurance) is a product that is typically not retailed by bank clerks. It is usually recommended via financial advisers. Bank clerks can only retail the products they have available to them and that means typically its MPPI and home insurance. In more recent times, some have been able to include life assurance on a limited basis and some can do income protection. Back when you did it, it would have required an appointment with a financial adviser.

It's all rather moot though because
1 - it is more than 15 years ago. So, no action can be taken via courts
2 - you are complaining you were not sold a product but this is more than 6 years past the date of the event and more then 3 years from being reasonably aware of an issue. So, any complaint can be timebarred
3 - The product sale you have clearly was suitable, you were eligible and it paid out when needed.
4 - Complaint about not being sold another product that the person was not authorised to sell is a non-starter.