I am getting rather "pissed off" with the delay in hearing from company A about my mis-selling complaint relating to my second endowment.

So I fired this off to them today:

"..
Customer Relations Admin Manager

Dear Mr ,

I refer to your letter dated 21 February 2003 (ref ...), in which you state that you are doing everything to resolve my complaint about mis-selling as soon as possible.

I have heard nothing since then, and am very dissatisfied with your handling of this matter; I would appreciate clarification on the following:

 My complaint was lodged with you on 10 October 2002. What is causing this excessive delay?

 I was promised a resolution to my complaint by 31 January 2003; this deadline has been ignored, why?

 When will you resolve my complaint?

I would appreciate a prompt, and non equivocal, response to the above points. Depending on the nature of your response I will consider referring:

 my complaint against you for mis-selling, and

 an additional complaint against you for the excessive delay and poor handling of my mis-selling complaint

to the FSA.

As with all other correspondence, this will be posted to my public blog “The Endowment Diary” on www.kenfrost.com.

Thank you in advance.

Yours sincerely.."

I apologise for being a little quiet recently. I have been putting the finishing touches to my book, and this has taken up a lot of time. However, I am pleased to say I have finished it now and can address other issues.

I received a note on The Forum the other day from a couple who are having trouble claiming compensation for mis-selling. In my opinion the mantra that the endowments were investments is mistaken.

My view is this, as repeated till I am blue in the face, the polices were sold like cars or washing machines; namely as products with a defined purpose to pay off the mortgage. These products have failed to meet this purpose and, as such, like a car that doesn't work should be replaced with something that does; at the expense of the company that sold the product.

This is the point that must be hammered home at every available opportunity. Forcing the "legal eagles" to recognise this as a point of consumer law rather than investment law is, in my view, the only way that people are going to get adequate compensation.