Endowment - Scottish Life Assigned policy query....

AFAIK you should get the money. I certainly did when I got some money from Scottish Widows and Im pretty sure it was assigned at the time. Are you sure you qualified? You should go via Royal London not the bs.

In message , Tumbleweed writes

I seem to remember that one or two of the LIfeInsCo demutualisations have only paid out benefits to members who were also the beneficial owners of the polices. In this case neither the life assured or the assignee satisfied both requirements, so no pay out to either of them. To my certain knowledge Scot Wids was NOT one of those LIfeCos.

I agree that there is no point approaching the assignee.

What bastards! AFAICS assigmenent is a purely arbitrary process. Some of my policies have goen from being assigned to unassigned and back again and finally at unassigned now as it seems to be out of favour. Just seems a whim on the behalf of teh BS and nothing meaningful. Until this happens. If you knew it was likely to happen you'd either be much more careful with your bs or which mortgage you took out.

In message , Tumbleweed writes

At one time ALL lenders took assignments over polices, they only stopped cos it got too expensive.

NO, it is the LifeInsCo that are the bastards. Why criticise the BS?

Actually, now I think about it, it is the MEMBERS of the Life InsCo that are the bastards because they approved the demutualisation proposal, so the OP's good friend, as he was a member, has only himself to blame.

YOu are right I didnt word it well enough. But maybe they are both bastards, since the bs should have intervened on behalf of their members, with the lifeco. As to the OP, I dont see how he's to blame, he may have voted against, and even if he voted for, I bet the details of who would get paid werent mentioned in the motion. I am also sure that they didnt mention these future intentions as to what they would do with the proceeds, when he got his policy..

In message , Tumbleweed writes

Sadly, the assignee, being the BS, didnt have the right to vote as they werent members of the LifeCo. Absurd??? Of course!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes they were. It was a topic of discussion at the time.

Of course they werent. How on earth could anybody possibly know what the motion was going to be when the policy was sold?

Well, obviously, as I said before, like, all credit to the rest of your rant, but at the end of the deh, an assignment is anything but meaningless. It means that the p/h needs the assignee's consent to any dealings with the policy.