|
*PLEASE NOTE* This site is
for information purposes only - we are not accepting
any new cases from January 2007
Case study The following case involves a client whose policy
matured with an actual rather than projected shortfall.
In this case, the client took out a policy in 1988 for a
17 year period. The policy was meant to meet a target of
£24,000 and the client was paying an above average
premium to accommodate the shorter term.
The client
first knew that the plan was in trouble only 2 years
before the maturity date. The policy was heading for a
£7800 shortfall. At the time the policy matured, he
recovered only £17000 which showed a £7000 actual
shortfall on the figure expected.
Fortunately the
client contacted us just in time to beat the 3 year
deadline which the
Regulator has
imposed for making a complaint of this kind.
We were
able to present the complaint on his behalf and
presented a strong case for misselling based on
important criteria relating to the original sale of the
policy. One very strong argument was the very fact
that the policy was not just projecting a shortfall -
the situation was now a reality and the client had lost
£7000.
We managed to successfully recover this amount
in full for the client and also an element of interest.
Back to endowment success stories
compensation injury claims -
personal injury claims -
accident claims -
criminal
injury compensation -
Law Society of
England & Wales -
industrial injury -
legal news -
accident compensation -
dog bite claims -
manual handling regulations -
clinical negligence -
online legal advice -
dental claims -
claim for your child -
personal accidents
▲back to top
|
