Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


2 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. We know I was told to have it, they probably know this but are saying otherwise. Is there anywhere to go on this?
  2. Indeed I guess I cannot exactly say this. How about the mortgage conditions saying I had to have life cover?
  3. Hi dx and all I thought I would have another try at this and explained I felt they had misunderstood my complaint in their comments that I knew it was not compulsory when I the product was added. The reply from them advised they would actually now investigate and interestingly there is no longer a mention of the time factor and needing to have complained within 3 or 6 years, relevant? My comments for you are the ones in bold and brackets. Here is the outcome: I’m writing further to our recent email exchange. Having considered all the information, I’m not supporting your complaint and my reasons for this are shown below. I’m giving you £ as an apology for the time taken to investigate your complaint since you originally raised it. (this is interesting or a tactic to persuade me not to appeal?) Your complaint You raised the following concerns: • You believe your DTA has been mis-sold. • Your mortgage was not an endowment mortgage, so there was no legal requirement to have nor should the bank have made the plan compulsory. • The only beneficiary was the bank through ultimate direct payment should something have happened to you settling your mortgage sum. Outcome Our records show that you took your above plan out on a non-advised basis (I do not agree with this as I was told I neeed to have this product but cannot recall when this happened) at your local branch on 2003. The branch representative that you would have seen wasn’t a financial adviser and therefore was unable to provide financial advice or make a recommendation about which plan would best suit your needs. You therefore took your plan out on a self-select basis without either seeking or receiving any advice from the bank. This would have been explained to you in full before you decided to proceed. You chose to apply for a DTA with an initial sum assured of £ over twenty-two years for a minimum premium of £5 per month. You’ve advised us that you took this plan out for protection for the mortgage you held with the bank at the time. I can see that you had taken out a mortgage with the bank on 1999 for £ over 25 years on a repayment basis. When you took this mortgage out in 1999 your mortgage offer confirms that it was a condition of your mortgage being granted that you take out suitable life cover for £. (were they able to make it a condition? And also why was it not added in 1999 but instead in 2003? I am confused about this) As above, the branch representative was not able to provide you with any advice. They were only trained to be able to provide you with information on the types of protection plans the bank could offer. It was then up to you to decide which plan you wanted to take forward if nay. Your plan would have been explained before you decided to proceed, and you were under no obligation to go ahead with the application. After your plan was issued you would have received your product brochure and policy booklet, which included your plan document and terms and conditions. These documents explained the nature of your plan and how it worked. You also would have received your cancellation notice that allowed you to cancel the plan if you thought it no longer met meet your needs or if you had simply changed your mind. (I do actually have a letter to this affect in the things I have, relevant?) Life assurance provides a valuable benefit and peace of mind. In the case of a plan taken out to protect a mortgage, when linked to a mortgage, it ensures that the estate or spouse of the life assured if applicable has the funds to repay the mortgage debt. In other words, it is meant to ensure that the surviving family or spouse if applicable aren’t left to repay the mortgage. I understand that the bank made your plan compulsory. I wasn’t party to the meeting when you took your plan out. I therefore have to base my decision on the documentation that we hold. As above, it was a condition of your mortgage in 1999 that you take out suitable life cover. However, I haven’t been able to find anything that would lead me to believe that you were told this plan was compulsory in 2003. I appreciate your comment that as the bank has accepted your complaint for your mortgage and loan Payment Protection Insurance (PPI), you believe this must be the case for your DTA also, as you understand there is very little difference between the eligibility criteria for the two. I would like to confirm that PPI and life assurance plans are two different products that provide very different benefits and even though they may be taken out for the same mortgage, they aren’t linked in anyway. We are also required to investigate each complaint on its own merits. PPI is designed to cover your monthly repayments on a mortgage if you are unable to meet them due to sickness, accident, or unemployment. PPI was also often included in your monthly mortgage payment unlike life assurance, which you had a separate direct debit for. A DTA is designed to provide a lump sum to enable you or your estate to repay the mortgage in the event that you die. Our Decision Although I am mindful of the concerns that you have raised, overall, I’ve concluded that you were able to make an informed choice to take your plan out. Therefore, I am unable to uphold your complaint. What are your thoughts about this please? Many thanks E
  4. Thank you for all of your help dx I guess I could always express my disappointment as a customer of nearly 30 years with them, nothing to lose. I do tend to agree with your point though
  5. Any thoughts please? Do I have anywhere to go on this? Cheers E!
  6. I'm sure I can just cancel this now though? The weird thing is the RBS agent is talking like she thinks I knew it was optional when the policy started (the bits in bold and underlined) Below I have listed the concerns you raised and overall, I have considered the following: • You believe your DTA has been mis-sold. • Your mortgage was not an endowment mortgage, so there was no legal requirement to have nor should the bank have made this plan compulsory. • The only beneficiary was the bank through ultimate direct payment should something have happened to you settling your mortgage sum. When looking into complaints, I am guided by the rules from our Regulators, the Financial Conduct Authority. These rules are known as the Dispute Resolution rules, or DISP rules. These rules place a responsibility on customers to raise any complaint or concerns within a reasonable period of time; a complaint should be raised within six years of when the advice was provided or, if later, within three years from when a customer first became aware (or should have reasonably become aware) that they had cause to complain. The concerns that you have raised above about your DTA were known to you at the time you took it out and therefore you ought to have reasonably been aware that you had cause for complaint at that time. Can I not just reiterate that I only realised in 2019, when I submitted all the claims together?
  7. Called Aviva... what does the policy actually do? Covers/insures my life over 22 years from 2003 and decreases by 10% each year if you died tomorrow what would happen ? The policy would pay out the amount it has reduced by at that time what payouts would goto who about what? Payouts would go to the estate and this is not linked to any property or any mortgage or company Thoughts? Very frustrating as I do recall being advised I needed to have this
  8. Do you think I have anywhere to go on this please? Should RBS have told me to cancel the policy when I stopped using them as a provider? Should Aviva have checked the mortgage was in place when it transferred to them in 2011? Does it make any difference RBS knew I wasn't living in the property 2003-2009? Many thanks
  9. As you have made this so black and white, I have just realised I have probably made a total mess up here Yes, the original RBS mortgage from 1999 changed in 2009 to a buy-to-let with a different mortgage company, for the same property. As I thought I had to have a life assurance, this would be ok, even though it was a much smaller amount. It states the policy holder as myself and the property address and says 'in return for the payment of agreed premiums the company will pay the benefits in accordance to the policy conditions' it doenst really specify who would be paid. I have actual document here. Something to mention, when I bought this property it was uninhabitable and I have never actually lived there. It was empty for ten years until 2009 when I got some additional borrowing, renovated it and let it out. In 2011 therefore when it changed to Aviva, that mortgage had been paid off 2 years before. I have a feeling you are going to say it was my responsibility to have cancelled the policy in 2009 with RSA or with Aviva? As I had been advised by RBS, I thought I had to life insurance/assurance of some kind as I had a mortgage.
  10. Actually, no, or at least not with RBS. I changed to a different provider in 2009.
  11. Ok thanks, i'll have a read and finger crossed. I wonder if there is a possible angle with Aviva if not as it transferred to them in 2011 I think it was
  12. Are you saying the 6/3 year rules does apply to me, even if I only realised it was mis-sold in 2019? The agent is talking as if I knew this was not compulsory in 2003 when I signed for it
  13. Thanks now working and i've had a read. I seems to make sense. They claim there were pressured into it, but were written to half way along advising it was optional and that would have been their time to complain. In my case, I certainly didn't have anything saying it was optional, either at the start or part way through. My form submitted in 2019 said Finally, tell us now why you are unhappy with the policy(s) that you purchased: I was told the ppi/associated insurances were compulsory for my situation and type mortgage and only recently learned this is not the case. Where do we go from here please?
  14. Hi dx Post 23 letter has been hidden as has a name in it. I did read the thread and in post 7 saw mention of 'must complain within 3 years of being aware it was mis-sold' if this is what you are referring to? Also my policy is live currently. I think you know this, but it seems the RBS/Halifax agent doesnt know, that 'I became aware it was mis-sold just before I raised my claim (2019) having read a media article' as I dont think the PPi team showed them the original claim form maybe, who knows. Expanding, sorry I missed the word PPi after 'loan' in my post you quoted and highlighted. To be clear, the life protector was not for a loan, but a mortgage, and that mortgage did have a mis-sold PPi on it which they have admitted and refunded. If it helps, I have several mortgage offers here from 1999 and they say 'Minimum life cover to be assigned to the bank' The odd thing here is, I started the mortgage and PPi in 1999 but it was 2003 this life assurance started. I do categorically recall being told it was something I had to have though. Many thanks E
  • Create New...