Royal London

Goss6564

I'm in desperate need of some guidance.
My step-sisters mother had a life insurance policy out with Royal London for her father, which matured back in 1999.
RL are claiming that they issued a cheque for the policy in September of 99, however according to the bank statements for her fathers account, no cheque was ever deposited into his account (or her mothers), so she is disputing she ever received it. 
Barclays have said they can only go back 6 years and even a deep dive (in branch and customer service) didn't show anything.
RL are saying the policy has been paid, however they have only provided evidence that the cheque was issued, not that it was ever received or that it was cashed, and my step sisters mother is adamant she never received anything from RL. 
According to RL in every other phone call up until now they "usually" pay out matured policies into the bank account the direct debit/payments came from, but are now saying it was actually a cheque.

 Where does she stand now in getting RL to pay out the policy? What are her options?

DullGreyGuy

Realistically, how good is your memory about what monies you did or didn't receive 23 years ago?

Having left it so long most banks will not have retained records for that duration to either show if the cheque was cashed or not and/or to show it (not) going into your relative's account. 

How much money was it? Was it a totally life changing amount where clearly you'd remember receiving £500,000 or was it something more modest that could easily be forgotten about (like your annual pay bonus... no idea what mine was in 1999 or even if I got one or not)

dunstonh

RL are saying the policy has been paid, however they have only provided evidence that the cheque was issued, not that it was ever received or that it was cashed, and my step sisters mother is adamant she never received anything from RL. 

The data that is likely to exist on a policy that ended 23 years ago is likely to be very minimal to almost non existent.

According to RL in every other phone call up until now they "usually" pay out matured policies into the bank account the direct debit/payments came from, but are now saying it was actually a cheque.

Call centre staff working today are unlikely to have worked back in 1999.   It is a low paid, low skill job that people don't generally do for long periods of employment (i.e. its not a career).   Whilst today, a cheque would be rare, back in 1999 it would probably have been the most common method.       Some young adults today don't even know what a cheque is.

Where does she stand now in getting RL to pay out the policy? What are her options?

it is unlikely that it wasn't paid out and presented.     So, you would need to prove it wasn't.

Whilst you have bank statements on one particular account, how do you know it wasn't paid into a passbook account that no longer exists (or other type of account)?   Again, looking at 1999, passbook accounts were still commonplace and maturities would often end up in a savings account rather than a current account.

Goss6564

This is the problem we are facing, as the cheque was issued to his name and he only had one account, and one savings account, to which both statements show low balances (£1k) in 2002 whereas the payout was £10k+, and as they never left the country and she was their carer (on carers pay)  with his state pension (Canada) coming in being more than the 2 Direct debits going out, she claims its not possible that money would have gone in 2/3 years, so it was never received.
We just don't want to go down the ombudsman route if shes up against it, if the onus is more on her to prove she never cashed it vs them having to prove the cheque was received/signed for or if it was ever cashed.

chrisw

Goss6564 said:

We just don't want to go down the ombudsman route if shes up against it, if the onus is more on her to prove she never cashed it vs them having to prove the cheque was received/signed for or if it was ever cashed.

There's no harm in gathering all the evidence you have and going down the ombudsman route anyway if you wish. It's not particularly onerous and they can only say no.