This is the last of the examples provided by the ombudsman in their February 2001 newsletter. We have listed them here.

The complaint

The policyholders said their adviser had 'promised' that their endowment policy would repay their mortgage when it matured. They claimed the company had later dismissed the adviser because of the large number of complaints against him and asked the company to repay the projected shortfall of £24,378.

The company denied both allegations and offered a refund of premiums plus interest totalling £15,126.84.

The ombudsman told the couple it could find no evidence to support their assertion about the adviser's 'promise'. The couple replied that the adviser had been under investigation by the company and had missold policies to 30 other clients. They claimed this justified the higher level of compensation.

So the ombudsman asked the company for the adviser's complaint record. 56 relevant complaints had been made against him, 21 of them had been upheld, and 3 were still pending.

The ombudsman's decision

Noting the high level of complaints, the ombudsman said that, with no rebuttal from the adviser, the balance of probabilities indicated that he had misled the couple.

The company did not accept that there had been any mis-selling but they offered a one-off payment of £5,650. If this was invested at 6%, it would produce £11,401 (the projected shortfall at 6%) when the policy matured.

They also asked the ombudsman to point out to the couple that if the company ceased to be a mutual and they surrendered their policy, they would lose any 'windfall' benefits.

The couple accepted the offer.