PPI paid in 2004 - used a broker, can I claim

-taff

triplesilk wrote: »

I don't get the first point at all, im sayjng that i could have turned capital into income if I wanted in the event that my income stream ceased so could I could ensure playing the mortgage off if that was my goal.

If you had lost your job, and if you had to pay your mortgage without an income, then selling your house meant you would have had to buy another outright in cash, because no-one would have given you a mortgage without an income. If that was what you meant by turning capital into income, except it's equity into income.

Again though, this is a moot point. You asked for a mortgage and you got one, and you decided to agree you needed insurance and you paid it.

I would never agree that protecting your mortgage is bad advice.

If he was a professional he would have asked you about your needs and wants [ I used one in 2000, and again in 2007, he asked me about whether I wanted insurance, and what I wanted it to cover] and would have recommended insurance for your needs. Or as I said, you had to purchase it because that's how you paid for his services. Either way, you were not a dupe, you were an adult who has to take responsibility for their actions.

This was 12 years ago now. It doesn't matter what most people would agree with or not, it dowsn't matter you have a list of reasons why not as long as your arm, your complaint is over. So you can spend as long as you like arguing about it, or feeling aggrieved about it, but nothing will change the fact that you will not have a successful complaint.

Sing the Frozen song to yourself.....

dunstonh

But I can change the equity into income surely? I mean, sell the house and rent somewhere or buy a smaller place etc?

That would be a lifestyle changing event. The sort of thing insurance is there to prevent. So, it just reinforces a need for the insurance.

If I lost my main job, then my firm (who are huge) would have paid me off for £50k at least in all likelihood, plus I had a second income that was considerable, plus I had plenty of cash left over as I kept some back to renovate the house, plus my parents would have lent me £50k at the drop of a hat if I needed it, plus I was highly employable at that time so would in all likelihood have quickly found a job if I needed to. These are all things that I would have explained to the broker had they not said that I had no option but to take the insurance.

Your employer wouldnt have to pay a penny if they failed.
Your cash left over was already earmarked to be spent. So not reliable as an emergency fund
Parents lending you money is irrelevant. It is not guaranteed. They may want to spend or could have spent the money or have it unavailable or at cost to them at the point you needed it. Plus, there is no guarantee they would. It is rare for this to be successful as a complaint reason.

Second income could possibly have some legs. However, it depends on your expenditure.

There is a reason why most MPPI complaints are rejected. It is not some short term unsecured loan. It is a debt on your primary residence. You seem to be accepting that you would sell it if a claimable event occurred. The insurance would avoid that happening.

The reasons are all largely irrelevant though as you bought pre-regulation. So, the broker doesnt even have to consider your complaint unless they were a member of an earlier body. Some were but most were not.