Endowment Complaints

RE: endowment mortgage. has someone been through the complaints process? I have a valid complaint. what happens to the existing mortgage, if they make me a offer,to compensate me i still have 10 years left , will the mortgage just continue the same. what happens next. The mortgage was mis sold

what does upholding a complaint mean in a mis sold endowment?

Endowment Mortgages. My experience with my endowment provider is that having complained they have upheld? my complaint that I have been mis-sold an endowment mortgage. My contention is that the company have produced a document I have not previously seen illustrating the possibility of negative equity on maturity, which is different from the original I have on file. Now this clearly fraudulent misrepresentation which I have challenged the company on who deny such practice was going on to secure business. I cannot divulge the companies name other than to say they based in Hertfordshire. They have offered me a return of premiums paid plus a derisory level of interest to close the policy as I am some 22 years into the 25 year policy and some £6k on the value and £17k short on projection. Anyone had the same experience of fraudulent misrepresentation

endowment policies? My endowment is going to fall short on the amount I have to repay. I made a complaint to standard life and they have come back with compensation of £3000. This is the difference between what my policy is worth and how much I would have paid off had I taken out a repayment mortgage. Is this a reasonable offer or should I try to go further, if so how do I do this.

Is the splc really out to help illegal aliens or to line their pockets? SPLC loses $50 Million. Bad news: $PLC can afford it Patrick Cleburne, VDARE.COM (April 8, 2009) Those of us who know and love the Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC, or more appropriately, in VDARE.com's considered opinion, the $PLC] have been naturally intrigued to see if this wealthy operation would be a victim of Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme... Immigration patriots are particularly interested in the $PLC [SPLC] because of its recent obsessive smearing of essentially every immigration reform group in sight. This includes naming as a "hate group" not merely VDARE.COM (which has responded by naming the $PLC a "Treason Group") but also the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) which the $PLC has absurdly claimed is "at the nexus of the American nativist movement" along with FAIR's equally harmless fellow Beltway herbivores, NumbersUSA and the Center For Immigration Studies. This new $PLC obsession is obviously odd because the huge post-1965 influx of unskilled legal and illegal immigrants, whatever else can be said about it, has been an unmitigated disaster for low income blacks-allegedly the $PLC's historic concern. Labor leader Cesar Chavez (ironically an $PLC hero) saw this dynamic clearly in the case of his farm workers, at that time largely native-born Hispanics. It's why the Howard Industries blacks cheered last year's ICE raid on their employer. Complaints, even from the Left, about the $PLC's [Southern Poverty Law Center] lack of interest in black and "Civil Rights" issues, and its extreme interest in money, date back at least to Ken Silverstein's classic The Church of Morris Dees (Harper's Magazine, November 2000) and JoAnn Wypijewski's ferocious defense of her criticism of the $PLC for ignoring local Black causes in her Nation magazine article Back to the back of the Bus (December 2000). The $PLC's Form 990 (PDF), which tax-exempt charities must file the IRS, and its Audited Financial Statements (PDF) are now available for the fiscal year ending October 2008. And the answer to the Madoff matter-no such luck. Our friends apparently escaped unscathed. But how did the $PLC manage to resist the allure of the so-called "Jewish T-Bill"-an operation which claimed to produce relatively moderate but extremely consistent returns over many years? Would that not be attractive to the $PLC as a prudent 501(c)(3) Charity-as it was tragically to so many others, and to so many Jewish retirees as well? .Of course, this investment objective did cause the $PLC to sustain $51.2 million in "Investment" losses in the Fiscal year closing 10-31-08. But this left the $PLC with some $167.8 million in total portfolio assets at the end of the year. And the implied approximately 30.5% FY 2008 loss is actually not exceptional. The S&P 500 lost 37.5% over the same period. (Of course, this makes the questionable assumption that it was prudent for the $PLC to be so exposed to stocks, rather than less volatile financial instruments like bonds or money market instruments). Essentially, the $PLC balance sheet looks similar to what one would imagine for a retired Goldman Sachs partner: property and working capital, plus a huge sophisticated investment portfolio. As of 10-31-08, the $PLC showed $35.6 Million (18.5% of its assets) in a kind of current account, called the "operating fund", which contains, curiously, all the physical assets including $16.9 million in depreciated real estate (to be fair- apparently no yacht!) This "operating fund" includes an investment pool of $11.6 million, on which losses of $1.2 million were sustained in FY '08. Presumably this is the management's dabbling/fun account. The balance consists of an investment portfolio, which stood at $156.2 million at 10-31 08. This is termed the "Endowment Fund". It is important to understand that, according to the $PLC's own Financial Statements, there are essentially no restrictions on this fund. In the Charity world, this is not what is commonly understood by an "endowment", which is usually dedicated to specific purposes, and often confined to spending income only. As Daniel Borochoff, President of the American Institute of Philanthropy, told Bill O'Reilly in 2001: "They want to build up their reserves just like you'd probably like to be a multimillionaire so you could live off the interest... It's not really an endowment [just] because the board called it that." (See NPI/SPLC Report II, Pp17-18) Proof of Borochoff's view of the $PLC strategy arose in 2008. Endowments are usually tapped in poor years, for operating expenses. But the $PLC transferred $4 million from its "Operating Fund" to its "Endowment Fund" last year-a clear demonstration of the management's Scrooge-like priorities. It is when one examines the details of this "Endowment Fund" that the $PLC's heroic dedication to money-making becomes glaring. P14 of the Financial Statements reveals that of the $156.2 million: $20.7Million (13.3%) was in "

Warning may contain offensive content, that said, title suggestion? As we consent with fractions of cent at the pumps that keep the global economy flowing it chokes hope slowly from our veins and even as complaints are made as though saying what is wrong is the same as doing something about it the silence was an awkwardness that lack the actions louder than words the absence of wisdom for why learn from our mistakes when it is more convenient to simply repeat them while others still wait for a godlings return so that there growing apathy is absolved the sink or swim father it would seem he has tossed into the abyss for as surely as there is a creator and that I am the result of his divine intention then so to is humanities sole endowment the erect stature of our station within the hierarchy of predation this rational capacity this ability to reason what waste would it be were it to wither in the absolute winds of dogma where one is never wrong if by the words of ancient men he swears upon

Complaint re: Bank error? My husband and I have banked with Lloyds TSB for many years and for the last 10 years, we have endured mistake after mistake. However, the last mistake they've made has left us in a right mess and I'm desperate for advice. Six years ago, along with many others, we received notification that our endowment policy was not going to reach its target. We decided at this point to switch to a straight repayment, cash the policies in and used them to extend our property. It was a worrying experience at the time and certainly put us off having an endowment mortgage ever again. However, you can imagine our surprise when we received a letter 2 weeks ago, asking what provisions we had in place to ensure our 'Interest' only mortgage would be paid at the end of it's term. My husband phoned them immediately, confident the letter had been generated by mistake and to our horror, discovered that it wasn't. The woman on the phone told us our mortgage had been interest only for 5 years and advised us to make an appointment to see a mortgage adviser at our local branch. We managed to get one that day and after much investigation, he discovered that it had been switched to 'interest only' 3 years ago. Thankfully, my hubby and I are fanatical about keeping records and we have been able to track down ever letter, mortgage statement, etc. during the period in question and there has been nothing to alert us to the fact this had happened. There's actually a lot more to this, like the fact we have actually had 3 meetings in the last 3 years to discuss new fixed rate terms and at no point was it mentioned. They are even continuing to make mistakes following he complaint, as we received another letter this morning to say our 'new' mortgage agreement was in place and yet again... it's "Interest only". This was following our appointment to sort the mess out. Can anyone advise us on what we should be seeking from the bank? We will be happy for them to put us back where we should have been had their mistake not been made, but I fear this might be unlikely. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. No, we definitely hadn't agreed to any different terms and the mortgage adviser we spoke to, couldn't even find any correspondence that would indicate why the mortgage was switched at all. No signed agreements, or requests from us are on their system. He advised us to complain and it took us 4 days to pull together a letter, as we had so much 'evidence' to link to each paragraph. My hubby is used to creating prosecution files (he was in the police for 16 years and is now a counter fraud specialist)... but we do feel incredibly out of depth with this and vulnerable. We did think about a solicitor, but then we're also mindful of incurring added costs. I think if we don't get anywhere with the bank, we will have to consult legal advice before continuing to the ombudsman. I can't tell you how scared we are, as we stand to lose an awful lot and our mortgage is in a right mess.

What is equality? In the name of equality or egalitarinism, practioners of "left-wing" values justify all their actions. Ok, so what is equality? We are all born unequal, from a competitive point of few. That is, some are born beautiful and/or smart and/or strong and/or tall, all of which confers varying degrees of advantage. Then, of course theres varying degrees of sexual endowment, no small "inequality" if you will pardon the pun. So when people whine about "inequality", should their complaint be filed with the government, or God? Its by a captilist or competitive market place where people can make-up for inequalities with their own hard world. Would Billy Joel be swimming in hot babes if not for the market reward his music product gave him? Ironically, left-wing systems that seek to supress or dismantle the free market system in the name of "equality" achieve just the opposite, unless such systems instituted cloning, so that all would eventually look the same. tehabwa: You miss the point. I am not arguing the necessity of laws that have been catageroized as "equal opportunity". They are practical and certainly not the domain of the left. In fact, they historically belong to the republicans. The left does broadly justify everything they do under the vague idea of "equality". Thus, it would be useful to understand what this really is and if it can exist or does exist. Indeed, I do think the left misplaces their general angst about cosmic unfairness upon those who advocate the most practical solutions.