I've got an endowment that is currently worth less than I have put in. It's now over 11 years old and still hasn't even levelled. I'm in a position now where I'm going to cash it in as I need the equity to move house. I'm thinking of complaining about the endowment as I have the original paper work which actually states that the policy will be worth more than is paid into it in the "first few years" of the policy and that after that it will make money (or words to that effect) Anyway, my questions are :- 1) Who should I complain to ? The financial company behind it? (CGU, formerly General Accident) Or is there an ombudsman type organisation who oversees these complaints? 2) Will my cashing it in (I really need as much as I can get now) ruin my chances of getting any compensation at a later date? 3) Is there a website with a guide of how to complain about endowments? If there's a standard letter which I can tailor to suit that would be great. 4) What are my actual chances of a result - Are most complainers getting something or is the usual response a "read the small print.... Your investment can go down as well as up" I'm not looking for major gains, to be honest I'd be happy if I just got back what I've paid in. I'm currently 1500 down. Cheers Cubik.

This is a good place to start, with details of who to contact & example letters: HTH Vic

How to complain about mis sold endowment?

Oct 12, 2003 24 Replies

Rate this thread:

Phil Deane 22 years ago

All endowment mortgages are interest only, just they have an endowment attached.

The bank must not have considered the payment of the endowment into the affordability calculation, thus making it a viable, although not preferred option

Vote

john boyle 22 years ago

In message , Phil Deane writes

Er, which seems to be what I said.

*IF* the lender was lending on that basis, then they were lending on a pure *interest only* basis, which is their prerogative, assuming no payment to a capital repayment vehicle. This would make the loan 'affordable'.

It would appear that the use of an endowment as a repayment vehicle was imposed by the broker. That is despicable in these circumstances.

Vote

Phil Deane 22 years ago

If they *really* wanted the mortgage, and the only way to do it was Interest Only, then that is the way they would have had to do it.

Who is to say that the broker did not have the customers best interests at heart by making sure a repayment method was in place? ( *cough* Commission

*cough* ) At that time the most common Interest Only Repayment method was an endowment.

What would have been the alternatives at that point in time? That would not have the same associated risk as an endowment? But remaining Interest Only?

Vote

john boyle 22 years ago

In message , Phil Deane writes

Remaining Interest Only.

The OP of this part of the thread said "The net result was that she did not earn enough to get a bank repayment morgage, but then was offered a Endowment morgage through their company. "

They were told that an endowment was the only way. Tish!

Vote

Phil Deane 22 years ago

That is my question. What option for repaying the mortgage would they have had at that time which did not involve an endowment or the associated risks of an endowment?

If other options are available then yes he was wrong, If there was none, that would have been within budget then he could have been correct

Vote