Friday, April 25, 2003

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

Thank you in advance.

Yours sincerely.."

Saturday, April 12, 2003

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.