Despite having an average of six grounds for complaint, around half of consumers responding to the survey have had their complaint rejected. The main grounds for complaint among those consumers surveyed are:
86 per cent were not told that there was a risk that the mortgage endowment would not pay off the mortgage
76 per cent were not asked about their attitude to risk
72 per cent were told that the policy was guaranteed to or would definitely pay off the mortgage.
91 per cent of the consumers who were told the mortgage would definitely be paid off were also led to believe they would receive a lump sum.
The research comes on the first anniversary of the launch of Consumers' Association's award winning 'endowmentaction' campaign. In only twelve months well over half a million people have flooded to the site for information on endowment mis-selling and 46,000 have used the 'letter generator' to help draft their complaint.
The survey also found that consumers who bought an endowment mortgage with a tied advisor are more likely to have had their complaint upheld than if they bought it through an independent advisor and that their complaint was less likely to be upheld if they purchased the endowment before 29th April 1988 when Financial Services legislation was introduced.
Most consumers surveyed accepted the compensation offered by the companies. However, worryingly, 72 per cent of those who rejected compensation did not then take their complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service and half of those whose complaints weren't upheld by companies did not then go on to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
The survey has also exposed delays by the financial services industry in dealing with complaints. Despite being obliged by the regulator to complete endowment complaints within eight weeks, 61 per cent of those surveyed said that the procedure had taken longer than this.
Sheila McKechnie, Director, Consumers' Association, said:
"Our survey has thrown up some interesting results. It is particularly worrying to see the number of people who are not going on to the Ombudsman despite the fact that they are clearly unhappy with the way their complaint has been dealt with. It is clear from our survey that more needs to be done by the FSA and industry to inform people about their right to take their complaint to the Ombudsman if they are unhappy with the way their complaint has been dealt with by companies.
"It is particularly concerning to see how many consumers did not have their complaints upheld despite possessing an average of six grounds of complaint. There is clearly a large gap between the experience of consumers and the way companies appear to be treating them. The FSA needs to address this by carrying out spot checks to see how companies are handling complaints.
"With so many consumers in our survey experiencing delays by companies in dealing with their complaint it is vital that companies are communicating properly with consumers, keeping them informed of how the complaint is progressing."
