We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Mortgage PPI (Abbey National)

Hi, Hope you can help with this one.

My husband and I were sold joint life Insurance, Critical Illness and Payment Protection in the mid 90's for our Mortgage re-payments. My husband is self employed so they added the payment protection element to it. We were paying quite a lot for it and I'm now wondering if we needed the PPI element at all. The only problem is we claimed against the Critical Illness element last year due to my poor health. Could you please advice if it is still worth pursuing a claim for the payment protection element of the policy linked to my husband being self employed? Thanks

Comments

  • Nasqueron
    Nasqueron Posts: 11,085 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    MPPI covered the self employed for the most part, not needing insurance is not a reason for it to be miss-sold - do you have any more solid complaint reasons? Does your policy cover the self employed?

    The bigger issue may be that if you were sold it in the 1990s, especially by a broker, it would be pre-regulation so complaints can be dismissed

    Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness: 

    People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.

  • Thanks for your response. From what I can remember we were told that we needed life insurance by Abbey when we took the Mortgage out. They than added additional cover for my Husband incase he broke a leg or arm at work (he's a carpenter) and could not make the re-payments. I guess the point is that we didn't need this element of the policy as I could have covered the bills if needed. This addition meant that we had to pay more per month. We took the policy out in the 90's it was updated again in 2001 as we moved from a flat to a house. Would this change anything in relation to the pre-regulation issue?
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 120,268 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    There were deals in the 90s that saw lower rates if you bought insurance via the lender. THe only requirement was the insurance should be suitable.
    I guess the point is that we didn't need this element of the policy as I could have covered the bills if needed.

    That does not make it missold.
    Would this change anything in relation to the pre-regulation issue?

    If you bought via the lender then its not an issue. Only if you bought via a broker.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.