We know I was told to have it, they probably know this but are saying otherwise. Is there anywhere to go on this?

Indeed I guess I cannot exactly say this. How about the mortgage conditions saying I had to have life cover?

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

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

Any thoughts please? Do I have anywhere to go on this? Cheers E!

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?

Yes HB, this is pretty much it

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

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

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.

Actually, no, or at least not with RBS. I changed to a different provider in 2009.

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

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

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?

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

Have a reply! I sent exactly as you said and... In relation to your comments regarding your claim about your other plans, these were Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) plans. PPI claims are allowed to be investigated after the 6 year time limit has passed. However, this moratorium is just for PPI plans and not for other plans or investments. During the infancy of the PPI review into possible mis-sold PPI plans, several ‘test cases’ went to Court. This was partly due to the fact that many PPI plan holders weren’t aware that they had taken out PPI with their loans, credit cards or mortgages (for example) in the first place. As a result of these Court rulings, the standard time limitations, as stipulated in the Dispute Resolution (DISP) rules, were lifted for PPI claims only. However, the DISP rules apply to your plan, as above, which is a Decreasing Term Assurance.

I have been waiting on another house news, but now decided to bite the bullet and send this letter as it needs resolving either way. The draft is good and have edited a few bits. What I don’t want to do is pay out for the surveyor and then the neighbour restores the area to grass, so have mentioned the survey is something I would do if we go to court and the fact I would be claiming this expense as well as damage. I called my insurance yesterday as want to know, if needed, if they would pay for the surveyor and court bits, as I have an excess to pay. They are going to call me. I am conscious of the fact you said if we let the insurance/legal team do it, we may not be able to dictate is as we wish. This is not exactly something I want to be doing at all, but I know I need to address it. Do you happen to know how quick these things move, if I had to start proceedings?

Ok great, they sent it by some fancy secure email system thing. I have the email address to reply to, assume this is ok?

Thank you. Just send this on its own? and not add it to the bit I drafted?

It seems not all the information from my initial PPi and associated insurances claim made in 2019 has been transferred over to you. I stated I was mis-sold the decreasing term life assurance, as at the time of purchase I was informed this was compulsory for my situation and type of mortgage. I only learned this was not true in 2019, along with the loan and mortgage PPi’s. This is within the six year limit you mention and would explain why RBS recently acknowledged the other two PPi’s were indeed mis-sold also and have since been refunded. This life assurance was transferred to Aviva in 2011 and is currently being paid monthly, whilst this is resolved. If I had known it was not compulsory, somewhere along the line I would have cancelled it. The statement I made that I do not have an endowment mortgage, so there ‘was’ no legal requirement to have nor ‘should’ the bank have made this plan compulsory, was from information I learned in 2019. Also that the only beneficiary was the bank through ultimate direct payment should something have happened to me, settling the mortgage sum. To be absolutely clear, the concerns I have raised were not known to me at the time of purchase and I was not aware that I had cause for complaint at that time.

Correct, a loan and mortgage PPi from before this 2003 product have been refunded Yes, it is active with Aviva after RBS transferred it to them It almost looks like this life assurance department didnt get all of the information from the 2019 claim I made, where I stated I was advised it was compulsory to have PPi and also this decreasing term insurance/assurance thing. In this case i'll draft a response stating these bits and ask to you give it the once over

sorry it is also six paragraphs along, the year is probably fine to leave, just not full date, thanks!

Can an admin please edit the date out of this?

Thank you for raising your concerns; when a complaint is received by the bank, we first need to consider whether it has been received within the time limits specified by the bank’s regulator, The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). These are explained in more detail further on in this letter. Having reviewed your specific concerns, the bank believes that they have been received outside of these time limits. In view of this, I have not carried out an investigation into the merits of your complaint. Your complaint It is important to make sure I have fully understood your concerns and have taken these into account during my consideration of your complaint. 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. If you believe that I have misunderstood your concerns or have missed anything out, then please let me know. My decision You applied to take out your above DTA on xxxx. 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. As above, you’ve complained that you believe your DTA was mis-sold because there was no legal requirement for you to have to have this plan for your mortgage and neither should the bank have made this plan compulsory. 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. If you were unhappy with any of the conditions attached to your mortgage, then you were free not accept the bank’s offer and to seek to get the mortgage you wanted with a different lender. Therefore, at that time, you had sufficient knowledge and opportunity to raise your concerns, which you have done so recently. Based on the information I have available; I am not aware of any exceptional circumstances which may have prevented you from raising a complaint sooner. In the circumstances, I believe that our Regulator’s DISP rules apply to the concerns raised regarding your plan. I therefore, am unable to consider your complaint further as, in my view; these concerns should have been raised no later than xxxxxxx 2009, which is six years after you took your plan out. However, if you have exceptional circumstances then please let me know. What can you do next? If you think that I have misunderstood anything about your complaint, or you would just find it helpful to talk through my findings, please call me on the free phone number shown at the bottom of this letter. I am happy to discuss your case with you. You may also have some paperwork which, having read my letter, you think could affect my decision. If so, please send it to me or call me to discuss this. If you are unhappy with my decision, you have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), free of charge. The services they offer are set out in the *Financial Ombudsman Service leaflet. The Ombudsman might not be able to consider your complaint if: • What you’re complaining about happened more than six years ago; and • You’re complaining more than three years after you realised (or should have realised) that there was a problem. The bank believes that your complaint was made outside of these time limits, but this is a matter for the Ombudsman to decide. If the Ombudsman agrees with us, they will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only do so in very limited circumstances (see below). If you do decide to refer your complaint to the Ombudsman, you must do so within six months of the date of this letter. If you do not refer your complaint to the Ombudsman within six months of the date of this letter, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances. The very limited circumstances referred to above include, where the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.

Got a reply today saying they are guided by Dispute Resolution rules, or DISP rules which places it on me to have raised a complaint within six years? It goes onto say because I have stated there was no legal requirement to have to have this plan neither should the bank have made this plan compulsory, I would have known this at the time I took it out (which I didn't!) and therefore ought to have been aware of cause for complaint at the time if I was unhappy with any of the conditions attached to the mortgage I was free not accept the bank’s offer and to seek to get the mortgage I wanted with a different lender. Therefore, at that time, I had sufficient knowledge and opportunity to raise my concerns, which I have done so recently. Based on the information, not aware of any exceptional circumstances which may have prevented from raising a complaint sooner. In the circumstances, They believe that Regulator’s DISP rules apply to the concerns raised regarding plan. therefore, unable to consider complaint further as, in view; these concerns should have been raised no later than 2009, which is six years after took your plan out. However, if I have exceptional circumstances then please let them know. What do you make of this? Obviously at the time I didnt know it wasn't compulsory etc...