Solicitor lost me thousands

sr4a

Hi Guys,

This is my last roll of the dice for my endowment mortgage.
Long story short, pursued everyone involved with endowment for misselling but could never prove who actually sold me policy.
Tried no win no fee firms etc but they would hit 'brick wall' as no way of knowing who sold me policy all parties involved denied liability.
Year after deadline had expired found letter from estate agents solicitor that we used stating they had contacted bank to change our mortgage from cap & int to endowment as we would have excess of thousands when mortgage paid off.
I had made it clear I did not want an endowment right from the start which he even mentions in the letter.
My question is, are they liable for my losses?
I contacted them and they denied liabity etc saying they no longer are the same company that I had dealt with in the 80's when they still trade under the exact business name etc and advised that if I persued this then I would lose and it would cost me money.
Can anyone help as I am so angry at the thought of losing because of someone else's mistake and wish I had found this letter years before the deadline...

Thanks,

Stephen

rtho782

Whats the company name?

It should be fairly obvious from companies house if they are the same company.

McKneff

You must have signed for the endowment polivy and also paid for it on a monthly basis for years. Did you not notice.

Did you give them instructions on paper that you adamantly didnt want an endowment policy.

davidmcn

sr4a wrote: »

they denied liabity etc saying they no longer are the same company that I had dealt with in the 80's when they still trade under the exact business name

Certainly true that if it's a different firm/company then you can't claim against the current one just because they're using the same trading name. Seems unlikely that they'd lie about that just to fob you off.

Anyway, if you're past the deadline then you're past the deadline.

AnotherJoe

Why do you think you've lost thousands ?

Almost certainly your endowment policy plus mortgage payment together was less than payments on a repayment Mortgage.

So you've had the benefit of lower payments for the life of your mortage and obviously you've been either saving or investing that difference for all these years, so youll have a lump sum and be able to fully pay off the mortgage.

Or you converted to a repayment mortage once but became clear the endowment wouldn't pay off, so the endowment will now come in handy as a nice lump sum..

sr4a

You must have signed for the endowment policy and also paid for it on a monthly basis for years. Did you not notice.

Did you give them instructions on paper that you adamantly didn't want an endowment policy.

Yes we did, it is mentioned in the letter from my solicitor, my point is we had set up Cap & Int at bank, solicitor contacted bank and changed this to Endowment and informed us that this was the best way to repay ie low repayment every month, excess money at end of term etc.
What my point is, is that no one ever explained how much commission went to seller of policy, risks of investment etc.
What right has a solicitor to ignore it's clients wishes. I pay him to do what I ask him to do, his advise was flawed (as we know now).
The bank was more than happy to change to an endowment.
Yes we had the power to say no but with solicitor and bank 'pushing endowment' then you trust their judgement to your own after all I was 19 when I bought my house!
If the endowment had paid out then it would not have been a problem but it didn't, I missed deadline purely cos I didn't have the proof as to who 'sold' me the endowment which would seem to be the bank, however my point is the solicitor contacted the bank to change the mortgage and we only found out when we went to sign the contract then we received the letter from the solicitor We could have said no, there and then, but the bank extolled the advantages of an endowment over cap & int.
The 'boat has sailed' over chasing the bank for compensation but I am asking as to whether the solicitor acted lawfully in his actions of ignoring my request?
I should have said 'no' to the changes, 'no' to the bank and there would not be a problem, but as we hear in the news that if you had PPI and you were not told about 'A,B or C' etc then it was miss sold. I was miss sold but whether I can point the finger of blame at anyone or do anything about it remains to be seen.

sr4a

Why do you think you've lost thousands ?

Almost certainly your endowment policy plus mortgage payment together was less than payments on a repayment Mortgage.

So you've had the benefit of lower payments for the life of your mortage and obviously you've been either saving or investing that difference for all these years, so youll have a lump sum and be able to fully pay off the mortgage.

Or you converted to a repayment mortage once but became clear the endowment wouldn't pay off, so the endowment will now come in handy as a nice lump sum..

Mortgage finished in 2013 shortfall of 13K as endowment had under achieved in investments Red letter came about 3 years before end of mortgage.
Comparison of Cap & Int against Endowments was only different by about £60 per month though interest rate peaked at 14% in 91/92 was still affordable as i asked what would be cost if interest rates shot up when applying to bank for mortgage, economists were predicting 'black friday' years before it happened as Chancellor Lamont was screwing up the economy.
Cost of cap mortgage as you know would reduce as years progressed.

davidmcn

sr4a wrote: »

The 'boat has sailed' over chasing the bank for compensation but I am asking as to whether the solicitor acted lawfully in his actions of ignoring my request?

It sounds like you ultimately changed your request (if only by failing to put your foot down at the time), but in any event the same boat has sailed, even if you could find the right people to sue.

mrginge

sr4a wrote: »

Mortgage finished in 2013 shortfall of 13K as endowment had under achieved in investments Red letter came about 3 years before end of mortgage.

Comparison of Cap & Int against Endowments was only different by about £60 per month though interest rate peaked at 14% in 91/92 was still affordable as i asked what would be cost if interest rates shot up when applying to bank for mortgage, economists were predicting 'black friday' years before it happened as Chancellor Lamont was screwing up the economy.

So you paid £60 a month less for how many years? 25?

Cost of cap mortgage as you know would reduce as years progressed.

Would it?

AnotherJoe

sr4a wrote: »

Mortgage finished in 2013 shortfall of 13K as endowment had under achieved in investments Red letter came about 3 years before end of mortgage.
Comparison of Cap & Int against Endowments was only different by about £60 per month though interest rate peaked at 14% in 91/92 was still affordable as i asked what would be cost if interest rates shot up when applying to bank for mortgage, economists were predicting 'black friday' years before it happened as Chancellor Lamont was screwing up the economy.
Cost of cap mortgage as you know would reduce as years progressed.

Errr, no it doesn't.

If you'd saved £60 a month for 25 years even without interest, that would return £18,000 which is more than the shortfall and had you simply saved that into high interest paying savings accounts, it would be roughly double that.

Now, fair enough you were living under a rock and didn't realise that your endowment would not make the number until the last minute, so I presume you'd just been throwing away the annual statements and not tracking progress, but you still had that £60 every month fir 25 years. That could have been saved, invested, put in a pension.

Did you do any of those ? If so, then an endowment mortgage still worked out OK for you and you didn't "lose thousands" or indeed anything at all.

dunstonh

solicitor contacted bank and changed this to Endowment and informed us that this was the best way to repay ie low repayment every month, excess money at end of term etc.

That cannot happen without your agreement. Endowment mortgages were cheaper than repayment mortgages. It was one of the most common reasons people went with endowment.

What my point is, is that no one ever explained how much commission went to seller of policy, risks of investment etc.

You dont need it personally explained face to face. If this was a post April 1988 sale, then you would have been given an endowment quote at point of sale. This would have been followed up with another copy posted by the insurer with the cancellation rights. These had the risk warnings and commission disclosure (depending on what year you bought it, commission disclosure may not have been required. Also, if it went through as non-advised, it was not required).

The bank was more than happy to change to an endowment.

That bank wouldnt have given it a second thought and had no preference either way. They would just follow instructions.

Yes we had the power to say no but with solicitor and bank 'pushing endowment' then you trust their judgement to your own after all I was 19 when I bought my house!

The bank would not push endowment if you were not using them to purchase the endowment.

I didn't have the proof as to who 'sold' me the endowment which would seem to be the bank,

If you bought it via the bank then there are no time limits and no arguements over who sold it.

however my point is the solicitor contacted the bank to change the mortgage and we only found out when we went to sign the contract then we received the letter from the solicitor We could have said no, there and then, but the bank extolled the advantages of an endowment over cap & int.

So, who completed the medical questionnaire and the direct debit mandate? If the bank sold it, then the bank staff would have been involved.

Your situation is very difficult to follow as your posts are not clear on who did what.

Mortgage finished in 2013 shortfall of 13K as endowment had under achieved in investments Red letter came about 3 years before end of mortgage.

Endowments started falling short in 2000/1. You would not have received your first shortfall warning in 2010. If it was short in 2013 by the amount your say then it would have been short in 2000.