Sell your Scottish Amicable Endowment
Scottish Amicable Endowment policyholders can sometimes get a better
price than the surrender value offered by the host company by selling
the endowment policy to an endowment policy company, that trades in
policies.
Selling your endowment policy is a simply achieved by
using the link above and filling in the form for an appraisal.
======================================================
Scottish Amicable has become the latest
insurance company to be fined £750,000 for miss-selling
mortgage endowments, by the city police at the Financial Services
Authority after problems with its sales processes between January and
December 2000 came to light.
Following a visit by the regulators in January 2001, Scottish Amicable
engaged a firm of independent accountants to conduct a sample review of
sales of mortgage endowment policies by the firm's appointed
representatives. This has led to the firm reviewing 33,781 policies
from January 1999 to February 2001. £11 million has been set
aside for redress payments for this period.
Scottish Amicable has also agreed to ensure that current mortgage
endowment policyholders who were sold policies by appointed
representatives between 29 April 1988 and 31 December 1998 will receive
redress where appropriate.
The failings arose because advisers did not place appropriate emphasis
on identifying whether a customer was prepared to take the risk that
their mortgage might not be repaid at the end of the term. This
resulted in policies being mis-sold.
Andrew Procter, Director of Enforcement at the Financial Services
Authority, said:
"This is a continuation of our work to make sure that mortgage
endowment customers that have been miss-sold get the compensation that
is due to them. The size and nature of Scottish Amicable meant that the
firm's failings exposed a large number of consumers to potential loss.
"Firms must act promptly and adequately when the regulator issues
guidance. The issues relating to mortgage endowments were well known in
the industry towards the end of 1999 and the firm should have acted
quickly and effectively on our guidance."
|
|