Jump to content

Endowment Mortgages


rocksaplenty
 Share

Recommended Posts

About 15 years ago I took out a Clerical Medical endowment mortgage ,when i bought my first house, the 25 year policy was to have a final repayment of 25k.

 

I thought i should probably make a claim for mis selling becuse the policy is a bit off track from hitting it's target and have just been told that they will offer me 3.5 k to settle. :o

 

Is it best to settle now or wait a few years to see if the endowment is even further off track to hitting the target of 25k? Apparently there is no cut off date for claiming mis selling on the type of endowment that i have.

 

I'd also advise that is anyone else has an endowment mortagage that was mis sold to them that they make a claim - i never thought they'd offer so much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are limits on making a claim, I think it is 3 years from your first red letter warning that your endowment will not hit target.

 

There is a longstop of 15 years in civil claims, but this has been disapplied by agreement with most financial companies subject to the red-letter rule above.

 

There is a lot of information about this on http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/factsheets/mortgage_endowment_complaints.pdf which should tell you all you need to know.

 

Do not fall into the hands of the no-win-no-fee claims advisor brigade because it really is money for old rope, and something you should be able to do for yourself, or at worst, with free help in filling the forms out, from your local citizens' advice bureau. Those companies do eventually charge you a fee based on a percentage of your payout.

 

Also see http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/making-a-complaint/mis-sold-endowments-how-to-claim/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Vipa.

 

I was advised to take out an endowment mortgage in 1994 and the policy is not going to hit target. However, at the time it was the correct advice for my circumstances as it made the mortgage a lot more affordable. So I am not going to say it was mis-sold by my adviser who is still a personal friend and who would not have sold me a pup.

 

It was not presented as a dead cert that it would make enough to pay off the mortgage, or that I would have money on top as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Vipa.

 

I was advised to take out an endowment mortgage in 1994 and the policy is not going to hit target. However, at the time it was the correct advice for my circumstances as it made the mortgage a lot more affordable. So I am not going to say it was mis-sold by my adviser who is still a personal friend and who would not have sold me a pup.

 

It was not presented as a dead cert that it would make enough to pay off the mortgage, or that I would have money on top as well.

 

 

Some were though... there were plenty of greedy unscrupulous salesmen around who couldn't be bothered to do their job properly! That's partly the reason that in the last 20 years the number of mortgage brokers out there hes fallen from 250,000 to under 10,000!!! There were over 30,000 3 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made a claim on my endowment, was told they had evidence that i had been warned that it could go either way,we also found a letter from them with all the paper work,so yes they had been honest.I cashed it in this year and got back what i had paid in,put another three grand to it and paid sixteen off the loan, I now have a repayment mortgage with about twelve thousad left to pay over the next five years,the advise to take out a endowment was a bad move for me but at the time you feel these people are doing you favour. :no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Investments can go down as well as up... a poorly performing investment isn't the same as it being mis-sold in the first place.

 

Very little miss selling, either or a combination of over egged sales pitch and believing customers!

 

But I have to add, if there are any loop holes use them.

 

15 years now since I left uni, and starting from a base of been a tight Yorkshire man, I like to "invest" my money wisely.

 

I started off back in uni days, and did quite well. I have managed to keep my isa's full each tax year, no debits etc.

 

But one "mistake" I made was joing the AXA sun life saving plan...you know the one Carol Smiley and the likes used to advertise.

 

15 year plan, but most people ending up with less than they paid in, but possibley £25 M&S vouchers or a Parker pen :lol:

 

Anyway, been more internet wise and money wise I found a loop hole in the system that was only valid for 2 years duing the sales period and the time a bought fell into that.

 

So after several letters I got back all my money + intrest and bas rate + X% :good:

 

Top tip

 

Never buy financial products advertised by a celebrity.

 

0511b026544eddff5cde24296f8c5f11.jpg

 

caf112c996dc8751aa3123c5e51c4474.jpg

Edited by V8landy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Investments can go down as well as up... a poorly performing investment isn't the same as it being mis-sold in the first place.

Too right. They indicated what the growth rate needed to be in order to meet the final projection. That's all you should have needed to know it was fantasy. It winds me up when all this undue compo is paid out, eating into my returns.

 

Still, grab as much as you can. I know I would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very little miss selling, either or a combination of over egged sales pitch and believing customers!

 

But I have to add, if there are any loop holes use them.

 

15 years now since I left uni, and starting from a base of been a tight Yorkshire man, I like to "invest" my money wisely.

 

I started off back in uni days, and did quite well. I have managed to keep my isa's full each tax year, no debits etc.

 

But one "mistake" I made was joing the AXA sun life saving plan...you know the one Carol Smiley and the likes used to advertise.

 

15 year plan, but most people ending up with less than they paid in, but possibley £25 M&S vouchers or a Parker pen :lol:

 

Anyway, been more internet wise and money wise I found a loop hole in the system that was only valid for 2 years duing the sales period and the time a bought fell into that.

 

So after several letters I got back all my money + intrest and bas rate + X% :good:

 

Top tip

 

Never buy financial products advertised by a celebrity.

 

0511b026544eddff5cde24296f8c5f11.jpg

 

caf112c996dc8751aa3123c5e51c4474.jpg

 

 

Ahhh but you can be forgiven for that one... who wouldn't go for Carol Smiley with her legs open sat on a pile of cash... :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made a claim on my endowment, was told they had evidence that i had been warned that it could go either way,we also found a letter from them with all the paper work,so yes they had been honest.I cashed it in this year and got back what i had paid in,put another three grand to it and paid sixteen off the loan, I now have a repayment mortgage with about twelve thousad left to pay over the next five years,the advise to take out a endowment was a bad move for me but at the time you feel these people are doing you favour. :no:

You will find that most mortgage advisors made diary notes at the time that they sold you the policy saying that they made all the statutory warnings of the risks. Even if this is not how you felt the conversation went from memory.

 

They were advised to do so by their company, or the company they represented. It was self protection for them at the time and it has proved to be a very strong safeguard for them against subsequent claims since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About 15 years ago I took out a Clerical Medical endowment mortgage ,when i bought my first house, the 25 year policy was to have a final repayment of 25k.

 

I thought i should probably make a claim for mis selling becuse the policy is a bit off track from hitting it's target and have just been told that they will offer me 3.5 k to settle. :o

 

Is it best to settle now or wait a few years to see if the endowment is even further off track to hitting the target of 25k? Apparently there is no cut off date for claiming mis selling on the type of endowment that i have.

 

I'd also advise that is anyone else has an endowment mortagage that was mis sold to them that they make a claim - i never thought they'd offer so much!

i got 3.8k back when i claimed

 

colin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will find that most mortgage advisors made diary notes at the time that they sold you the policy saying that they made all the statutory warnings of the risks. Even if this is not how you felt the conversation went from memory.

 

They were advised to do so by their company, or the company they represented. It was self protection for them at the time and it has proved to be a very strong safeguard for them against subsequent claims since.

 

Alternatively, most advisers did cover risk & reward as they had to and because it was a specific section on a fact-find document... It's amazing how many people comletely 'forget' this part of the interview and thier responses to the questions when some claims company is waving a few grand under thier noses!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alternatively, most advisers did cover risk & reward as they had to and because it was a specific section on a fact-find document... It's amazing how many people comletely 'forget' this part of the interview and thier responses to the questions when some claims company is waving a few grand under thier noses!

is that what you use to deal with? :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is that what you use to deal with? :good:

 

Yep, did plenty of endowment mortgages in the 90s... A huge section of the bank fact-find was devoted to risk but it was very rare for someone to bracket themselves in the very cautious (i.e. recommend a repayment mortgage only) bracket. Most people put themselves at low to medium which opened up endowments and later ISAs (using the bank's scale.) Then, most people when offered the flexibility and POTENTIAL extra benefits of an endowment chose that route... At that time there was no question about investment performance, everything had gone more or less up for decades.

 

I remember watching some expose where they secretly recorded salesmen selling endowments... I remember vividly one bloke guaranteeing there would be enough left after paying the mortgage off to buy a yacht! :o There were some dodgy advisers out there but in reality I recon 80% plus of the 'misselling' claims that went in were raised for no other reason than greed... Last time I looked, only a small percentage of endowments were way off track and even that doesn't spell 'mis-sold.' But, as the courts have done with PPI, they made it incredibly expensive verging on the impossible for firms to defend their advice which in turn opened the floodgates for the ambulance chasers!

Edited by Vipa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, did plenty of endowment mortgages in the 90s... A huge section of the bank fact-find was devoted to risk but it was very rare for someone to bracket themselves in the very cautious (i.e. recommend a repayment mortgage only) bracket. Most people put themselves at low to medium which opened up endowments and later ISAs (using the bank's scale.) Then, most people when offered the flexibility and POTENTIAL extra benefits of an endowment chose that route... At that time there was no question about investment performance, everything had gone more or less up for decades.

 

I remember watching some expose where they secretly recorded salesmen selling endowments... I remember vividly one bloke guaranteeing there would be enough left after paying the mortgage off to buy a yacht! :o There were some dodgy advisers out there but in reality I recon 80% plus of the 'misselling' claims that went in were raised for no other reason than greed... Last time I looked, only a small percentage of endowments were way off track and even that doesn't spell 'mis-sold.' But, as the courts have done with PPI, they made it incredibly expensive verging on the impossible for firms to defend their advice which in turn opened the floodgates for the ambulance chasers!

 

I disagree and quite strongly, we have had two endowments, 1 of which went red; after a personal tussle the company accepted we had bought an endowment as a financially logical product to meet our assessed needs and had maintained payments despite the opportunity not to. We received a substantial compensation simply from a personal approach , based on facts we had ourselves. However the company concerned made the claim difficult and in a falling market delayed payment until some spurious and previously provided detail had been reprovidced.

We lost £600 as a consequence and, despite all we could do, they got away with it. One wonders whether this was an attempt to recoup the costs lost in settlement.

The second policy, linked to legal and genaral was actually based on the companies performance and NOT on the general Unit Trust basis. This policy was a spectacular success, based on the comapnys performance - 15 % growth in 2009 but downgraded by the comapny in expectation of poorer results in 2010. Friends of ours were less lucky and lost a lot. I have no sympathy for the suppliers of these products, they have no concience and, in my view, no morality excepting greed. You may be a well inetntioned guy VIPA but there has been, as you well know, a LOT of screwing the less well informed public.

I have no time for the sellers of financial products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree and quite strongly, we have had two endowments, 1 of which went red; after a personal tussle the company accepted we had bought an endowment as a financially logical product to meet our assessed needs and had maintained payments despite the opportunity not to. We received a substantial compensation simply from a personal approach , based on facts we had ourselves. However the company concerned made the claim difficult and in a falling market delayed payment until some spurious and previously provided detail had been reprovidced.

We lost £600 as a consequence and, despite all we could do, they got away with it. One wonders whether this was an attempt to recoup the costs lost in settlement.

The second policy, linked to legal and genaral was actually based on the companies performance and NOT on the general Unit Trust basis. This policy was a spectacular success, based on the comapnys performance - 15 % growth in 2009 but downgraded by the comapny in expectation of poorer results in 2010. Friends of ours were less lucky and lost a lot. I have no sympathy for the suppliers of these products, they have no concience and, in my view, no morality excepting greed. You may be a well inetntioned guy VIPA but there has been, as you well know, a LOT of screwing the less well informed public.

I have no time for the sellers of financial products.

 

 

??? What exactly do you 'quite strongly disagree' with?' I don't think I put anything that could be 'disagreed with' just an educated personal opinion

 

The first endowment you mention did not perform... you tried to seek redress... was this policy 'mis-sold' to you, i.e. not appropriate, the correct sales procedure not followed, your attitude to risk not considered? or were you just ****** that it hadn't achieved what you had hoped? there is a gulf of a difference there. Advisers and product providers do not have crystal balls, they cannot see the future and don't have the magic key that stops the markets from falling. You don't see people bitching about the fact that thier endowments went to the moon during the good times in the 80's do you? Understandable but still a bit of a paradox. When you are looking at performance data that shows performance of a product outstripping expectations for a decade or more with nothing on the horizon that would suggest that would change, you sell the products with confidence and they are bought with confidence, unfortunately **** happens. There aren't many people out there that can say with hand on heart that 4 years ago they could see the world would be in this financial mess now!

 

What I am saying is that PROBABLY more than 80% of the 'mis-selling' claims that went in were not 'mis-sales.' They were products that didn't perform as expected, mainly due to external factors beyond the seller's or provider's control... BUT... the way the courts then dealt with a small minority of cases made it financially difficult verging on the impossible for firms to defend advice... therefore the bigger firms just paid out without question, the smaller ones went bust... hardly a fair situation in the grand scheme of things.

 

You always seem to read what you think I'm saying in my posts rather than understanding WHAT I'm saying Kes ???

Edited by Vipa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me, as a 'practitioner' you seemed to defend the practice. You suggest some peoples expectations were grossly unrealistic.

I disagree with that view, suggesting instead that those who sold these products knew what they were doing and what might result.

I also remember well how the first 2/3 monthly payments went to the seller in 'comission'.

Selling financial products has been a dirty business for a number of years. Those 'in the know' selling to 'those who trust' morality being absent.

Sorry - jusy MPO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You always seem to read what you think I'm saying in my posts rather than understanding WHAT I'm saying Kes ???

 

Vipa,

When I was a kid, I told my dad he needed to be clearer about what he was saying, as it did not come across as he intended. He said it was my fault for misunderstanding his intention.

He was clever and erudite guy, as you are, it does however, go without saying that what anyone tries to convey is their responsibility and not the responsibility of the reciever to deduce what was intended.

We both know where you are coming from and IMHO, sellers of financial products assessed the phsyche of their audience and confused the message so it would be better received. I dont believe I am wrong. If I am then they were criminally incompetent and should not have been able to dupe people.

Since there is no answer to that, shall we call it checkmate ?

I dont think you will want to concede, based on previous posts so, I may reply tomorrow, as its late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me, as a 'practitioner' you seemed to defend the practice. You suggest some peoples expectations were grossly unrealistic.

I disagree with that view, suggesting instead that those who sold these products knew what they were doing and what might result.

I also remember well how the first 2/3 monthly payments went to the seller in 'comission'.

Selling financial products has been a dirty business for a number of years. Those 'in the know' selling to 'those who trust' morality being absent.

Sorry - jusy MPO.

 

 

Now... the Government, well, the FSA actually are about to roll out something called the Retail Distributio Review... this effectively bans commission on investment products. The upshot is that anyone wanting and needing investment advice (and lets face it, most people, including me, do not have the knowledge or resources to do it PROPERLY themselves) will have to pay, probably thousands... the work involved is huge!

 

This will effectively push 90% of the poulation away from financial advice as they won't be able or willing to cough up that kind of fee... this means that only the wealthy will be able to afford or have the desire to seek professional advice.

 

That 2/3 months premiums you state is how the adiser/ firm makes a living. It meant they DIDN'T have to ask you to pay a fee... now, if I asked 100 people how they want to pay for this advice, £500 up front or by commission... which do you think the VAST majority would choose.... certainly not the fee route.

 

We all need to make a living... do you work for nothing? You seem, by your statements to begrudge the company making any money off the sale and therefore begrudge the adviser a wage ??? Would you also kick up a stink in Comet due to the fact they make a profit on the flat screen TV they just sold you...

 

I genuinely don't understand where that attitude comes from ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now... the Government, well, the FSA actually are about to roll out something called the Retail Distributio Review... this effectively bans commission on investment products. The upshot is that anyone wanting and needing investment advice (and lets face it, most people, including me, do not have the knowledge or resources to do it PROPERLY themselves) will have to pay, probably thousands... the work involved is huge!

 

This will effectively push 90% of the poulation away from financial advice as they won't be able or willing to cough up that kind of fee... this means that only the wealthy will be able to afford or have the desire to seek professional advice.

 

That 2/3 months premiums you state is how the adiser/ firm makes a living. It meant they DIDN'T have to ask you to pay a fee... now, if I asked 100 people how they want to pay for this advice, £500 up front or by commission... which do you think the VAST majority would choose.... certainly not the fee route.

 

We all need to make a living... do you work for nothing? You seem, by your statements to begrudge the company making any money off the sale and therefore begrudge the adviser a wage ??? Would you also kick up a stink in Comet due to the fact they make a profit on the flat screen TV they just sold you...

 

I genuinely don't understand where that attitude comes from ???/quote/

 

 

 

After this I am going to bed - a hard day beating and a few brandies.

 

You are not daft. No praise intended. If a market exists, a service will provide for it - the competition ethic. All I argue for is a reasonable commission. I would give this advice free, as I think people need to know how to protect their savings and to plan for the future; maybe there is a middle ground. If Comet chose to sell me a flat screen TV at a ridiculous profit, I would vote with my feet, courtesy of the internet which was not around in the time these con men were selling the first Endowments.

Go on, tell me they are hard-working, genuine peole, who are really concerned about the investor who trusts to them their life savings.

Oh please, I give you more credit; do the same for me.

We will continue tomorrow as I am cream -crackered and need my bed. Good night.

Edited by Kes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch

I bought my first house just as the endowment bubble was starting to burst. I have friends who were 'caught short' by this whole debacle.

When I bought my current house I ended up with a 30yr repayment (at the age of 31) and I now am thankful that eventually the house will be mine.

A lot is talked about on the web about how renting is more de rigeur/normal on the continent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...