Looking for advice on a number of fronts..

Working_abroad

Hi Forum,
Been reading some posts but I still some advice....

I took out a mortgage as a first time buyer in 1999 - (does this fall in unregulated years?).
Mortgage advisor was attached to Barnard Marcus, with insurance attached at the last stage via tick-box on a form I can no longer find.
No separate paperwork on the PPI ever sent to me, and actually forgot about it.
Took a PPI policy with Nationwide in 2010 (I did say I forgot about the first one from 1999)
Got made redundant in 2011, started cleaning up all the Direct Debits, and only realised the Direct debits were not Nationwide's, once I cancelled that PPI (ok, this all sounds stupid i know).
Started working abroad in 2012 (could not find work in the UK). So I understand any PPI would be invalidated then, right? Life was a bit crazy then, while I straddled 2 countries, then worked out living in a foreign country and doing the family thing.
Direct debit for original PPI was still merrily being deducted ("Norwich Union Ins", then later "Wessex Admin NU"). Noticed this and cancelled in 2017. have DD bank statement evidence from 2000, which I only dug out of storage recently.
Called Wessex NU (effectively Aviva), but they say they cannot help as they did not sell the policy to me.
Been chasing around ever since for months, short story: Original Barnard Marcus Mortgage broker is now owned by Sequence UK, but actually was underwritten by Royal Sun Alliance in 1999, then later got taken over by Sequence UK. Sequence say they only started taking responsibility for mortgage insurances sold since 2002.
RSA have no record of my policy. So even if I made a claim it would have failed?

I feel I have some cause for complaint, although yes, I could have been more organised financially. A lot of this only became clear when I came back recently to the UK and accessed bank records from storage, since only 6 years are kept these days by the banks themselves..

1) Reading the conditions for misselling on this site, on the original PPI, I think I was missold, as it was indicated that my Nationwide mortgage application would likely not succeed if I did not take it. Although I was a first-time buyer, I was in a full-time employment in a decent job since 1994 and I met all the criteria for the mortgage itself.
2) I did lose my job, but never got round to making a claim on the second PPI (I always thought I would walk into another job and wouldn't need to invoke it!). Can I make a retrospective claim? (Incidentally, a routine PPI check on this insurance resulted in Nationwide refunding me ~£290 due to overcharging).
3) If I moved abroad, can I claim back on deductions due to insurance being invalid (for both?)
4) it seems unfair to have paid premiums for a policy that does not seem to exist! Should Aviva not offer some redress if this is the case?

Thanks for any advice in advance.

SonOf

I took out a mortgage as a first time buyer in 1999 - (does this fall in unregulated years?).

If you used a bank then no. If you used a broker/adviser then yes.
Barnard Marcus are an estate agent. So, that means you are pre-regulation.

with insurance attached at the last stage via tick-box on a form I can no longer find.

Mortgage brokers/advisers don't use the insurance products of the lender. Partly as the lender is not set up to retail its products via third parties, partly as the lender wont pay the broker for using their insurance products and partly because lender insurance products are not good value for money compared to whole of market options.

So, its highly unlikely it would be a tick box. It would be an application form.

Started working abroad in 2012 (could not find work in the UK). So I understand any PPI would be invalidated then, right?

Almost certainly.

1) Reading the conditions for misselling on this site, on the original PPI, I think I was missold, as it was indicated that my Nationwide mortgage application would likely not succeed if I did not take it. Although I was a first-time buyer, I was in a full-time employment in a decent job since 1994 and I met all the criteria for the mortgage itself.

Possibly but not necessarily. A lot of mortgage brokers at the time required a purchase of insurance as a condition of using them to get free mortgage advice. That model is allowed as long as the insurance is suitable. The MSE article doesnt mention that but it also doesnt mention many other variations either. Mainly as PPI is not seen to be an adviser/broker issue. Advisers/brokers account for under 1% of PPI complaints and the majority of those fail. Articles have to be short and simple. So, MSE will leave off variations and minor areas to focus on thg big areas. i.e. the banks.

2) I did lose my job, but never got round to making a claim on the second PPI (I always thought I would walk into another job and wouldn't need to invoke it!). Can I make a retrospective claim? (Incidentally, a routine PPI check on this insurance resulted in Nationwide refunding me ~£290 due to overcharging).

Theoretically yes. However, in reality, unlikely. Mainly due to the length of time that has gone by. You would need evidence you signed on. Evidence that you were made redundant (not sacked or left by choice). 7 years on, that is unlikely to be readily available.

3) If I moved abroad, can I claim back on deductions due to insurance being invalid (for both?)

Sometimes you can but in most cases you cannot as you are in control of your finances. You would be reliant on a goodwill gesture from the insurer.

4) it seems unfair to have paid premiums for a policy that does not seem to exist! Should Aviva not offer some redress if this is the case?

It doesnt exist now because you cancelled it. It existed at the time.

Working_abroad

Thanks for the reply.

So if I can summarise:
I fall under pre-regulation, my case is MPPI, so my claim has little chance of succeeding?

Furthermore, (and I am reading between the lines here a bit), since the premium payments were separate from the mortagge payment, and not built into the mortgage payment, it is not seen as true PPI?

Having said that, I hold absolutely no paperwork regarding this (and I keep all my paperwork, just not conveniently to get to, since I am working abroad).

I may have some chance to get some refund on my premiums if proof of not being in the UK can be provided?

Any payment from my Nationwide PPI would be on a good will basis - one thing is I did not sign on, as I didn't see myself off the market for very long. I do have paperwork and emails of a lot of applications, and training for re-hire. So the lack of signing on is a problem.

On the last point of the policy not seeming to exist, and I take the point I cancelled it, but from a consumer point of view, I seem to be charged for a lot for no actual product. If the insurer can say "actually, you were not covered in all those years, but we are keeping those premiums thanks"...that doesn't sound right. I realise we are falling outside PPI here.

Thanks

SonOf

I fall under pre-regulation, my case is MPPI, so my claim has little chance of succeeding?

If its not a bank, building society or insurer sold product and you bought it pre-regulation then you complaint does not need to be considered by the firm.

Furthermore, (and I am reading between the lines here a bit), since the premium payments were separate from the mortagge payment, and not built into the mortgage payment, it is not seen as true PPI?

It is still PPI. However, its how PPI should have been set up. You can still buy two types of PPI today. Regular premium MPPI and regular premium PPI (not linked to a mortgage). These two still exist because they have a purpose and are considered more important than loan and credit card PPI and they were set up away from any debt. Just like most other insurances you may have.

I may have some chance to get some refund on my premiums if proof of not being in the UK can be provided?

A possibility. Don't bank on it but it is possible that the insurer will give a goodwill gesture.

Any payment from my Nationwide PPI would be on a good will basis - one thing is I did not sign on, as I didn't see myself off the market for very long

That ends that bit then. It is a requirement for you to sign on in a claim.

On the last point of the policy not seeming to exist, and I take the point I cancelled it, but from a consumer point of view, I seem to be charged for a lot for no actual product. If the insurer can say "actually, you were not covered in all those years, but we are keeping those premiums thanks"...that doesn't sound right. I realise we are falling outside PPI here.

The insurer doesn't know that unless you tell them. it's like paying for Sky TV but never telling sky you no longer have a TV. Or a gym membership where you haven't been to the Gym in the last 2 years.