Quick question on mis-sold endowment.

OnlyAlan

First-time poster - please make allowances.

Before I knew her, my wife took a mortgage linked endowment with Black Horse in 1994. She settled the mortgage in full in 1996 when she sold the house, but still has the policy. Would this mean that she would be wasting her time with a claim for mis-selling as her mortgage was cleared in 1996?

Thanks in advance.

sheslookinhot

On what grounds was it missold ?

OnlyAlan

sheslookinhot wrote: »

On what grounds was it missold ?

Inappropriate to her situation, risk of shortfall not explained, best advice not given, attitude to risk not taken into account, etc.

dunstonh

Would this mean that she would be wasting her time with a claim for mis-selling as her mortgage was cleared in 1996?

Yes. A complete waste of time. In 2 years she would have paid very little off a repayment mortgage and the difference between the surrender value and the repayment mortgage would be very little. Indeed, unit linked endowments quite often are better than repayment mortgages after a few years.

Inappropriate to her situation, risk of shortfall not explained, best advice not given, attitude to risk not taken into account, etc.

I know what the sales process was for black horse (via lloyds bank) in 1994 and if followed correctly by the adviser then there was no chance those accusations would stick. BHL sales process included provision of an endowment vs repayment cost comparison being issued and on the suitability report a statement which I can still word to this day off the top of my head that says that the mortgage will only be repaid if the target growth rate of x% p.a. is achieved. This was then signed by the customer to say they undestood it. Of course, they werent always followed correctly but what evidence does she have to say it wasnt?

She is probably timed out as well as it has been 12 years since the mortgage was repaid. Why hasnt she complained at any time in the last 12 years that she was mis-sold?

OnlyAlan

Dunstonh - thanks for such a prompt and clear reply. Much as I expected from what I have read on these forums but I appreciate having it clarified.

As a matter of interest - she isn't timed-out as the red warning letters have been sent to an incorrect address - she actually has the endowment questionnaire - she will simply have to write back saying she will not be continuing with the matter.

She will be happy to hear that she hasn't lost-out ... seems fair enough to me.

Thanks again.