CU set shares agains loan for terminally ill member, and now won't pay death benefits

Crugers said:
I either posted or I didn't! If I posted then quote me!
Click to expand...

All yours posts on this thread ignore the substantive issues I raised. Its a little pointless to quote all your non engaging posts. Keep dancing around the issue in an irrational manner I'm done trying to have a rational debate with someone who ignores the substantive issues but engages in splitting hairs on the small stuff. You must work in academia or the civil service where such pointless waffle passes as productive engagement - I work in the real world;)
 
It would be interesting to have an update on this thread.

I was involved in a very similar case not so long ago. My girlfriend's father passed away. He had also been diagnosed with a terminal disease. His health declined rapidly within a matter of weeks. It was totally unexpected and of course sadly the inevitable happened. During the trials and tripulations with hospital visits he missed a couple of his his credit union loan repayments. There was no warning from the credit union that they intended to offset his shares against his loan. They just went ahead and did it anyway. Some may say they had the right to do so but it was all exceptionally hasty from their end.

My friends father had told her that she was his nominated beneficiary so she had always been well aware of that. Some months after her fathers passing she approached the credit union but they refused to reinstate her fathers account. An attendance at the AGM raised some eyebrows but the committee were insistent they were not in the wrong and were looking out for the interests of their current customers and maybe if her father had informed them that he was ill this wouldn't have happened.

Under the freedom of information act she got a copy of her fathers case file. Ironically her father had informed them he was ill. Immediately after her fathers phone call they offset his shares against his loan leaving his nominated beneficiary with noting.

The Ombudsman were very helpful throughout this time but unfortunately the Credit Union were not very compliant with them either. They refused to issue the Ombudsman with a copy of the nominated beneficiary form that the deceased had signed because the credit unions high powered legal team had advised them against issuing a copy of this to the nominated beneficiary or the Ombudsman.

So with the Ombudsman unable to persuade the credit union, my friend was no longer emotionally able to pursue her complaint. She was simply tired after the long running battle. She did try seeking a solicitor to take on her case but was turned away by numerous. She finally let the credit union win because it was very unlikely that the outcome for her would have been successful. The cu walked away with less than 20k. Sadly her father did not make a will. This would have been very helpful for the Ombudsman as it would have established that she was indeed the beneficiary.

I wish the original poster luck with their pursuit and hopefully you are more successful.
 
Last edited:
Patrick J.

If you hold on file that CU had noted father was ill , I strongly feel you have a case.
The problem with these Payment Protection Insurance (ppi) type cases is well shown on other ppi threads.
Most solicitors avoid ppi , in that they know that contract law is on Banks side and fairness rarely wins!
If you ring me on 0872437139 I will give you some advice.

To be clear , I have been on ppi cases for 2 years now and have an interest in them.
 
Just after reading most of this thread and sympathy to the deceased and their loved ones.
This thread would make me less sympathetic towards the Credit Union movement. I know they have the strong arm of the central bank leaning on them but they are also local community organisations and should act with compassion and a bit of discretion. Even if that means standing up to the central bank at times.
In Boomtobusts case they ended up making a payment at a later date and in doing so accepted they acted hastily and wrongfully at an earlier date.
 
Hello,

While lurking I noticed that this thread was being discussed again.

Apologies for not updating. It's been a dreadful couple of months. My S-I-L could no longer handle the pressure and is no longer pursuing this case. The CU made it very difficult for her.

Not having letters of administration brought the case down.
 
I'm not surprised. It can be a bruising affair. The deceased getting dragged through the mud. It can all become overbearing for the people involved. As both our cases seem quite similar I wouldn't be surprised if their were more like it out there. A colleague is currently going through a somewhat similar case which I mentioned on these forums too. I wonder how many older credit union members have relied solely on the nominated beneficiary forms being as good as a Will and on their death the cu wont pay out the beneficiary because no Will was n place? Is a persons' estate required to go through probate before a cu will make good to the beneficiary? There are so many unanswered questions. My gut instinct tells me we are going to see an avalanche of such cases.

Hi Gerry, thank you. I will be sure to pass on your contact details. Unfortunately her dealings with the cu have put her off dealing with them again. They played hard-ball big time. Banks in this country get a hard time and I've had my own difficulties with them too but never have I came across such hard-nosed antics.
 
Gerry Canning said:
Patrick J.

If you hold on file that CU had noted father was ill , I strongly feel you have a case.
The problem with these Payment Protection Insurance (ppi) type cases is well shown on other ppi threads.
Most solicitors avoid ppi , in that they know that contract law is on Banks side and fairness rarely wins!
If you ring me on 0872437139 I will give you some advice.

To be clear , I have been on ppi cases for 2 years now and have an interest in them.
Click to expand...
Gerry, this is not a PPI issue. Its a Life Savings insurance issue which the member does not pay for directly, I'm not sure if your two years of PPI experience will be any use in these circumstances.
 
Cu Manager.

The point I was highlighting is that if Cu has accepted father was ill ,yet took funds that meant Fathers Life Insurance was invalidated then Cu have acted poorly.
I know it is not PPI insurance but if policy on Life Savings insurance was sold by Cu then surely the Cu have erred?
I have a very good Solicitor contact who I use who would give good solid legal advice to poster .
 
Gerry Canning said:
Cu Manager.

The point I was highlighting is that if Cu has accepted father was ill ,yet took funds that meant Fathers Life Insurance was invalidated then Cu have acted poorly.
I know it is not PPI insurance but if policy on Life Savings insurance was sold by Cu then surely the Cu have erred?
I have a very good Solicitor contact who I use who would give good solid legal advice to poster .
Click to expand...
Gerry,
You specifically mentioned PPI in your post so you will forgive me for assuming that you were treating this as a PPI issue.
There was no sale of a policy, this is "free" cover not part of the credit agreement.
Why not outline the specifics of this case to your solicitor friend and post his thought on the thread for all to see? (Just be sure to remind him that its not a PPI case and the CU did not sell the insurance - just for clarity)
 
Cu Manager;

Once the Life Insurance is included in the agreement it becomes part of the contract .
So to {break} it when accepting customer is ill , just seems wrong.
I am around long-nuff to know issues get {fudged} and that is why I gave poster my phone number .
I would want great clarity in case before I would give or get (hard) advice.
In general I have found Cu,s very fair with customers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top