Endowment UK

[maca_s_2000]

I foolishly replied to an email from Brunel Franklin who operate as Endowment UK to see if I could get any compensation for being mis-sold an endowment back in October.

Now I'm finding myself battling with them as we don't seem to agree on what classes as a win.

 

To cut a long story short my endowment has a protection on it that says if the policy doesn't make what it should then they will boost it up a bit and give me a % back of the shortfall.

 

So hey ho as you've probably guessed I was granted compensation which removed this promise however, it was a hell of a lot lower than my price promise which would mean if I accepted then I was going to be at a financial loss.

 

So I told them I'd decline the offer and keep the promise, they have then charged me £450 as they say they still won compensation.

Their literature states no win no fee - you have nothing to lose.

 

I've wrote back to them advising of the misleading literature and also advising of breach of contract under sales of goods act for not providing reasonable care and skill, as all documentation was sent to them before they agreed to persue the claim and that they did not use their professional judgement in my case.

 

I'm currently awaiting a reply from them but just wondered if anyone thinks I've got a case against them.

 

Thanks

[alanfromderby]

This is a very complex one - I would suggest a chat with the Law Society - 0845 608 6565.

[maca_s_2000]

Had letter from Brunel Franklin advising that they are looking into my complaint and take all complaints very seriously, etc etc.

 

Have also lodged a complaint against them with the OFT for misleading literature. Prepared to defend this as far as possible as don't think I should have to pay for something that they haven't done for me. Have spoken to 2 legal advisors and both of them agree but I guess the proof will be in what reply I recieve once they have "investigated" it.

 

I'll keep this thread updated incase anyone else has a similar experience.

[dax]

I had the same situation re a misold policy and contacted a solicitors advertising no win no fee in manchester, paperwork was exchanged in the form of them sending me their contract but I had my doubts.

 

As I understood it, even if you had cashed in your policy, you may still be entitled to compensation. Just to be safe, I cashed in the policy for a few thousand and then intended to re pursue the policy review and compensation claim thinking anything extra would be bonus, while expecting the solicitors would take a fee and pay me last, possibly out of pocket, I secured an amount first directly from the endowment company.

 

Now listening to you I am glad I did and have not got round to re pursuing it yet although am aware of time limits given

 

Let us know the outcome as I see solicitors as whit collar criminals from experience.......

[maca_s_2000]

Well had my response which says they don't believe they are in breach of contract and the Pearl promise attached to my account is not a guarantee and they have attached a "document" which is in fact a newspaper article from the independant which says some aren't paying them out. Whilst newspaper articles provide useful advice they are in no way a legal opinion so find it as a bit of a desperation attempt by Brunel Franklin to include it as a defence. Contacted my endowment co who advises as policy matures next year there is no reason why I won't get this promise.

Not happy about Brunel Franklins tactics at all, have spoken to just about every agency there is but it doesn't seem to come under their remit. Finally contacted Brunel and asked who their regulators were which is the Claims standards authority, when asked for the no. they said a Supervisor would ring me back with that info...funny I thought they were required by law to give that info on request?

 

In response to you Dax, my advice is not to go through a solicitor or any third party. As I have subsequently found out this can all be done by yourself with the same results and you get to keep all monies awarded. If there is nothing on this site, check out www.moneysavingsexpert.co.uk where all the paperwork is there ready for you to complete.

 

If you do or have gone through a solicitor and you are not happy with them or the fees they apply then I believe you can report them through the law society.

 

As for me, I am not prepared to pay a £440 fee for something I haven't got and am prepared to fight it all the way.

[Loula]

Hi1

 

It is the Claims Standards Council (not agency)

 

Their website is http://www.claimscouncil.org/

 

It has a Consumers Advice link which you may find useful

 

LOULA

[maca_s_2000]

Thanks Loula

 

Have had a response from Brunel Franklin and basically they have told me that in order to resolve this matter I need to pay them a "nominal fee" of £100 + vat and they will close the account. This is to help with some of their costs in providing this service to me. I have told them that had I been aware that I had to pay them for the service then I would have no problem in paying it, however I entered into a no win no fee agreement so feel like I might as well throw £100 down the toilet as they have done nothing for me except give me a headache. They have said that either I accept the offer or it will go to their legal dept and there will be £100 automatically added onto the £448.

 

Not sure what to do at this moment, do I pay the £100 and have it be a lesson learned for the future, or do I stick to my guns and refuse to pay and lodge my complaint with the claims standards council?

 

Any advice would be appreciated.

 

Many thanks

 

Maca

[maca_s_2000]

OK the pressure is on, have to accept the the offer in next few days or it goes to the debt collection agency.

 

Really don't want to give up on this, any suggestions as to what I should do?

 

Thanks

[dw190]

Did Brunel Franklin ever send you a client care letter of their t&c's including an estimate of their costs and if so did you sign and return a copy of it to them?

 

From their t&c's: http://www.endowmentuk.com/terms-conditions.asp?sid=0

 

9.1 The company’s liability in respect of the services is to provide the same with reasonable skill and care. Any warranties implied by law statute or otherwise are excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law.

[maca_s_2000]

Having gone through all the paperwork I've got from Brunel Franklin, I was sent out in Oct an authority form for them to act on my behalf, a letter of engagement which set out ts and c's and and a compensation application form all of which had to be signed and returned to them "as quickly as possible" no copies were sent for my reference. I guess I should have copied them really.

 

I knew the fee was 25%+VAT for successful claims which was fine, 75% of something was better than nothing, but I never dreamed that they could class me losing money as a "win".

 

"9.1 The company’s liability in respect of the services is to provide the same with reasonable skill and care. Any warranties implied by law statute or otherwise are excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law."

 

I understand the reasonable care and skill part which I have quoted to them but not sure what the second part of this means?

 

Both managers that I spoke to have confirmed that this is normally how the Pearl work, my response, fine but why didn't you warn me of the implications that making a claim could have before we started when you had all my paperwork there detailing the promise. Their response was it doesn't happen every time and they can't predict what compensation I will be awarded and at what cost. Surely that shows that they haven't dealt with my case with care and reasonable skill.

 

The more I think about this the more determined I am that I am right to take this as far is it can go , but at what cost will it be?

 

Need advice urgently, am I fighting a losing battle?

[dw190]

I personally think you have grounds on the "Reasonable Slill & Care".

 

If the paperwork for your endowment showed the guarantee made by the insurer would make up any shortfall Brunal Franklin should have identified this and advised you accordinly.

 

Do you have any Legal Assistance insurance attached to your home insurance that would cover a claim against BF?

[maca_s_2000]

Not sure about the home insurance legal cover but will check tommorrow, however have just sent off a lengthy e-mail to the claims standards council, thought I might as well get the ball rolling while I'm waiting to decide whether to pay up or not.

 

I've also claimed in the email to them that Brunel Franklin are negligent and in breach of the data protection laws as they have sent me out someone else's endowment statement, am I right in saying that?

 

I just get fired up and go off on one and should have checked that one out before I included it.

 

Has anyone had any dealings with the claims standards council and what I can expert them to do on my behalf? Have read their website but it's still not clear.

[dw190]

I've also claimed in the email to them that Brunel Franklin are negligent and in breach of the data protection laws as they have sent me out someone else's endowment statement, am I right in saying that?

 

 

Personal data must be processed SECURELY.

 

For you to get a copy of someone elses data would constitue insecure processing of personal data which as you say is a breach.

[maca_s_2000]

This is the response I have recieved from the Claims Standards Council:-

 

"The CSC can only investigate a member on behalf of a complainant once the

member's grievance procedures have been exhausted.

 

If you have a complaint against Brunel Franklin you must complain formally

to them. I have forwarded your message to our chief executive and policy

director for their information."

 

It doesn't appear very helpful, any suggestions as to what I should do now as the deadline for their ultimatum has been and gone, I am expecting to recieve a letter from their debt collection dept any day now.

[trundlecat]

I am by no means a legal expert but if I were you I'd send them the £100 with a letter saying you're doing so NOT to pay for a service as you don't believe you've had one but in order to stop them adding further fee's & costs to the account. I'd then say that you're continuing to take advice over their "services" & fully intend to take them to the small claims court for a refund should you find proof they're in the wrong. I'd also write something along the lines of demanding £100 in order to stop the alleged debt spiralling to over £400 is tantamount to blackmail & as an ordinary, law abiding person you feel you have no option but to pay them. Don't forget to then threaten them with "Which?", BBC Watchdog etc etc.

 

At least you haven't then got to work to their time frames & you're free of the threat of further debt that could spiral even higher. The legal fight's great but somtimes playing the disgruntled consumer gets you just as far. I've just won a small battle with NPower playing it this way that would have probably gone on for ages had I taken the legal route (they sent me my cheque back & 2 x A4 pages telling me why they're a responsible company).

 

But that's just what I'd personally do as a (now) stroppy consumer (thanks to this site lol).

[maca_s_2000]

Mmm, certainly worth considering, the only problem is how do I find proof that they are in the wrong, although I believe my whole argument is proof enough.

 

Can you tell me a bit more about what you have done or is it on one of the threads?

 

Many thanks trundlecat.

[trundlecat]

I haven't written it up as it all started before I found this web-site.

 

In a nutshel we moved from NPower to BG in Oct 05.... in Feb 05 NP decided to send us a nasty letter for £221 we allegedly still owed. I refused as we'd paid our supposed final bill from them (they say the final bill was estimated & this new bill was based on a reading??). It went backwards & forwards for a while & eventually it had gone to their collections dept who said as we're nice you can send us £150 as settlement, if you don't there'll be added costs to the original amount. I sent a cheque with a letter stating my whole argument, the whole story & saying I was disgusted, felt I had no option to pay, in my opinion they were blackmailing me, I was going to make it my lifes work to let folk know about this etc etc & they sent me the cheque back.

 

At the end of the day these companies are there to make a profit & I expect they rely to some extent on word of mouth & recommendations for new business. So, at some point they'll have to weigh up if (what is to them) a small sum of money is worth all the hastle you might cause them.

 

I'm afraid I don't know how you can prove your argument (although I personally agree with you) as I have no experience of endowments. Sorry I can't be more helpful

[maca_s_2000]

Have e-mailed Brunel Franklin and said that I would pay the £100 but would take it to the small claims court to recoup it back. Have studied the contract and believe they are in breach of several of their t's & c's, have told them of my intent to contact which, bbc watchdog as well as the information commisioner's office about the dpa breach. Followed it up with phonecall to pay the £100, they said they wanted the full £448 due but advised them of letter rec'd agreeing £100 in full and final settlement (although deadline had been and gone).

 

Any suggestions as to what to do now? Should I get straight onto moneyclaim and start court procedings and follow up on my threats or should I wait to see if payment has been taken first?

[trundlecat]

Send them a letter with the felt blackmailed, court threat, publicing your case stuff in it & see what they come back with.

[BotB]

This is a very complex one - I would suggest a chat with the Law Society - 0845 608 6565.

 

No point. They can't do anything. These people are not solicitors, they are claims farmers. They are long overdue for regulation but its coming.

 

I posted on another thread about this where someone was advertising for business on behalf of a claims company chasing the Yes car credit victims for PPI insurance recovery on a no win no fee basis but taking 40% of anything recovered.

[maca_s_2000]

Well the cheeky so and so's have sent me a receipt for my £100, but they have also sent a letter saying it is in full and final settlement of the account. Should I send them a letter now requesting it back or just cut to the chase and issue a moneyclaim?

[maca_s_2000]

Have decided to amend the letter before action letter giving them 14 days to refund the £100 before taking action.

[maca_s_2000]

Have recieved reply back from Brunel saying they are not going to refund any money to me and will vigorously refute any claim against them, they say that they have recieved a mail from the CSC who are satisfied that they have acted properly.

 

I have had no reply from the CSC in answer to my complain made against Brunel.

 

What do you think I should do, should I still go ahead and use the small claims route and what would happen if I was to lose?

[sam1]

Dear Maca,

 

I wish I had read your post before now, as you are certainly being given the run around by this company. I would say from what you have outlined, the company are liable for misrepresentation and breach of contract. I also think that they would be liable under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. They are probably also liable under an obscure contract law principle known as the parol evidence rule, which prevents a party to a contract from adding or varying the agreement, once it has been signed.

 

I hope this is helpful. I wouldn't pay them a penny, but I am bl**dy minded!

 

Kind regards,

 

Sam.

[maca_s_2000]

This is excellent thank you.

 

Have managed to look up most of what you have said,found a nice bit about misrepresentation so could definately state that if I go to court. Also managed to find something that I was able to understand on the parole evidence rule, so how it would apply to my case would be, the information I was sent out prior to signing the agreement stated "no win no fee - you have nothing to lose" so that could be deemed as an implied term of the contract no matter what the contract says....have I understood it right??

The unfair contracts acts that you mentioned I've managed to look up but am unsure how this would apply.

 

With regards to paying them I wasn't going to but eventually decided to "pay under protest" at least this way enabled me to take them to court rather than the other way round.

 

To be honest it's more about the principle of it than the money, I believe I had a good case before but with your advice I think my case just got a lot stronger, have managed to pull several of their t's & c's out as breach of contract inc data protection which they have conveniently managed to ignore. I just need to prepare my claim so that I can deliver it the court as they had said they will defend any claim I make against them.

 

By the way if I lose does anyone have an idea of what I can expect to pay out. The moneyclaim site says all fees incurred by the defendent but it doesn't say what these could include.

 

Many thanks everyone