endownments issued in 1980

dunstonh

I'm not sure what most of that has to do with my post. My answer was not a blanket response to cover all endowments which is why i said that endowments with little potential for growth need to be looked at.

However, using a straight line projection process on a product that has up front charges is not going to produce an accurate projection.

Endowments that are performing above what was shown on the illustration are above track (years 1-10 etc). Yet the red/amber/green projections are showing those same endowments as having a shortfall. This does not help the situation at all and could lead to people surrendering perfectly good endowments.

EdInvestor

There are reasonable endowments around which should not be surrendered,but normally it's not related to the terminal bonus, but to a high guaranteed value,combined usually with low premiums, from what I've seen.

Most Standard Life holders should also wait for the demutualisation bonus, though anyone with a large fund with a big TB amount could consider going early IMHO - not that there are many such people left, sadly.

There are a few insurers whose WP funds have emerged relatively unscathed and whose policies are a lot more likely to perform: eg the Pru and some of the small mutuals.

Any endowment investor whose health has deteriorated since buying the endowment may be better to stick with it, as the cost of replacement life cover may be high.Same applies to people who have got a lot older since they bought the endowment.

Everyone should check the cost of new life cover (if needed) before surrendering.