Endowment Risk #3 - The Financial Services Authority (FSA) defines "Key Risk".

A further major development then took place in 2002, when Mr. John Tiner (then the Chief Executive of the FSA) wrote to all firms involved in endowment complains suggesting he was unhappy with the general standard of complaints handling. He produced guidance notes, the major conclusion of which is that assessments (of endowment risk) should recognise "that the key risk for consumers is that the endowment may not repay the mortgage loan". Furthermore, "this risk is different in nature and consequence from the usual investment risk of an endowment policy".

As most firms had not even considered these matters, this made it more difficult for them to defend a complaint with key risk as its central theme. Some firms have since been dealt with by the FSA's Enforcement for failures in their in-house Procedures based on the guidance letter and more are expected to follow. This is one of the reasons why CPH / Endowment Risk is now involved to such an extent because the firms simply cannot be trusted to handle their complaints properly, (also see Risk #5 below).

Endowment Risk #4 - Investment Risk.

As well as the key risk (which is nowadays referred to as the capital shortfall risk), there is the obvious risk that the recommended policy fails to perform well enough to repay the mortgage amount. In its defence, the firm who advised you is likely to say you were willing to accept such risk with the repayment of probably your largest debt in order to secure a tax free surplus at maturity, so therefore it was your own fault. In hindsight, it might appear as though you had taken leave of your senses but that was the recommendation by the firm as the most suitable way to repay your mortgage or more sinister this was the only offer 'on the table'. This part of your claim has to be dealt with carefully and with skill because arguments based on performance are likely to be rejected and a fine line has to be successfully navigated to draw the distinction between performance and mis-selling. You will now begin to realise that consistently successful claims handling is not the 'breeze in the park' some ill informed pundits would have you believe as each set of circumstances are different.

CPH offers a professional endowment claims handling service. No win, No fee.

As mentioned earlier, in 2002 the decision was taken that CPH would offer a professional service on a no-win, no-fee basis (see tariff below) so that clients would have a wider choice of whether to make a complaint on their own behalf or to subcontract this task to a professionally qualified group. As CPH understood compliance issues and more importantly, what had gone wrong with the endowment approach to repaying a mortgage, we felt confident in improving upon the poor success rate of DIY complainers. The Endowment mis-selling Scandal was now manifest and our first decision was to design (and later perfect) a unique approach, which would ensure the maximum impact at the level to whom we were complaining, specifically based on capital shortfall and investment risk and the other matters arising. The major bonus with this focused approach was the experience since gained in receiving many thousands of victories we are able to view this from a position of strength and experience. Please refer to the list of testimonials on the right of this page for confirmation. Consider why our web-based novice competitors do not have any testimonials; one can only assume they haven't got any! It may be of interest to you to know we have successfully negotiated well in excess of £30 million in compensation on behalf of our Clients.

Fee Tariff.

The cost of the service is one quarter (i.e.25%) of all sums of redress paid. There are no other deductions, so therefore you are ensured 75% of all receipts. This is strictly on a no-win, no-fee contingency basis, so your position is secured in the unlikely event that the redress be nil. The surrender value of your policy is specifically excluded, as this is your property.

To clear up any confusion that you may have in your mind, the method of calculating the compensation does not aim to make up any anticipated shortfall that you may be facing on your endowment policy at maturity, rather it aims to put you back into the position you would have been today in if you had been correctly advised to have a capital repayment mortgage from the outset. Therefore assuming you have, say a £10,000 shortfall at the maturity date, the loss is likely to be less at this point-in-time. Indeed, our average invoice is circa £750 implying an average loss of £3000. The rest of your mortgage can then be switched to a repayment approach over the same term which of course provides a guarantee of repayment - problem solved! Should you wish to keep your policy, as qualified advisers we will be able to advise on the pro's and con's of this for you.

Endowment Risk #5 - Nearly 50% of endowment claims are calculated incorrectly.

With thousands of complaints successfully turned into victories every week, the last thing you would expect is the offer of compensation (redress) to be incorrectly calculated. Disappointingly, having dealt with all the major endowment firms, every single one of these struggle to get their redress figures consistently right. Just like CPH they have had 5 years experience, but relatively simple matters seem to confuse them. Complex issues are often way beyond their comprehension, which is unsurprising considering most are contractors to whom you are just a number. A DIY complainer would therefore have no idea that the amount offered may be incorrect and have no way of finding out. To accept an offer simply because it appears satisfactory is plain stupid because once it has been accepted this would be in 'full and final settlement'. It is interesting to note that out of the thousands of victories we have had you can count on the fingers of one hand where the firm has mistakenly paid too much. You can draw your own conclusions why these firms underpay!

CPH has just concluded a case where the original offer was £300 and the firm has now agreed to pay over £25,000. The CPH philosophy on this issue is delightfully simple: "if it's right that's fine, if it's wrong it will be put right" - end of story. Our skills in ensuring the compensation is correct have been reported in the press and our knowledge increases with every victory we receive. Novice complaint handlers often seek our help in some of their cases!

Finally, we have enough confidence in our ability to offer all endowment mortgage policyholders a review on a free of charge basis. We will provide an honest appraisal of the likely outcome of the complaint process if we are handling your complaint as there would be no point pursuing an un-winnable case and wasting your time and ours. Some firms have introduced a time-bar because they wish to mitigate their losses. We therefore recommend an early enquiry because time is fast running out.

Assuming that you would wish to proceed to the next stage, CPH Financial Advisory Services' in-house endowment experts will review your situation and offer advice on your potential endowment claim. The link below will take you to the 'review policy' page. Complete and submit the form and one of our Advisers will telephone you shortly. This service is free of charge and without any obligation.

Polite Notice : If this is your first contact with CPH Financial Advisory Services please complete the 'review policy' form. We will then be in a position to fully discuss your situation in the light of accurate information.

Legal Disclaimer
In the preparation of this site every effort has been made to offer the most current, correct and clearly expressed information possible. Nonetheless, inadvertent errors can occur and applicable laws, rules and regulations often change. Further, the information contained herein is intended to afford general guidelines on matters of interest. The application and impact of laws can vary widely, however, from case to case, based upon the specific or unique facts involved. Accordingly, the information in this site is not intended to serve as legal, accounting, tax or financial advice. Users are encouraged to consult with CPH Financial Advisory Services professional advisers for advice concerning specific matters before making any decision and CPH Financial Advisory Services disclaims any responsibility for positions taken by individuals for any misunderstanding upon the part of users. Not all products/services are regulated by the Financial Services Authority (F.S.A.) and in particular the complaint handling process described above. Claims are handled by CPH Financial Advisory Services of the Bath Master's House, Davenport Street, Macclesfield, Cheshire, SK10 1JE The Principal of which is Mr. Michael J. Cooper.