Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,768
Your post is timely as far as I am concerned. I had a with profits endowment policy with Friends First taken out in September 1988. Capital amount borrowed was the equivelant of Euro 42,712.78. Cheque received from Friends First last week was Euro 40,536. Shortfall of more than Euro 2,000.00. Not to mention that the quote I received from Friends First in September 1988 foresaw a surplus of Irish Pounds 13,600.00 after the mortgage was paid.
When I raised the shortfall with Friends First they blamed the shortfall on deterioriating market conditions. Although I have had initial discussions with both the financial regulator and the ombudsman's office I am not hopeful. Relevant legislation on endowments was enacted in 1995 (Credit Intermediaries Act) and 2005 (Ombudsman Financial Services Act) -I am not excatly sure if these are the correct names for the two Acts.
Unfortunately neither of these Acts, as far as I understand it, do not have retrospective provisions. Pity, as the majority of these products were sold in the late eighties and early ninties.
I have now begun a disputes procedure with Friends First on this matter. First step, I have written to them asking them what the procedure is. Still awaiting a reply. When this procedure is finished and I am sure that the outcome will be not satisfactory from my point of view, I can then go to the Financial Ombudsman with my complaint. I suspect he will dismiss it on the bassis that product was sold before 1995 or 2005.
When all this is over I am then considering through sites like this raising the issue of endowment shortfalls and floating the idea, with other disgruntled customers of these instituions, of investigating the possibility of a class action ( I have to familiarise myself with how these work but I understand there are precedents in the U.K.)
Endowment Mortgage shortfall – not upheld
Holders of an endowment mortgage were advised that their 15 year mortgage would be repaid
after a period of 13 years & 7 months. After 14 years the holders received notice that the
proceeds of their policy would not be sufficient to discharge the mortgage debt. They
complained that the mortgage provider failed to assess and notify them of the performance of
the policy, and it was not until 14 years had elapsed that they were made aware of the
anticipated shortfall of the proceeds.
The Ombudsman found that the holders had been kept informed during the course of the
mortgage and the manner in which the fund fluctuated up and down had been explained to
them. The complaint was therefore unjustified and was not upheld.
Comment
The Ombudsman will not make an order for compensation to be paid in situations where the
investor was fully informed of the risks involved and the poor return is merely a consequence
of the performance of the markets.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?