Adviser takes legal action against Scot Prov
An adviser has entered into a legal dispute with Scottish Provident about the way he was allegedly treated over a conflict regarding commission payments.
John Stewart, chartered insurance practitioner for Essex-based PMI IFAs, said he was seeking £2640 from the insurer to compensate him for the administrative burden he has been through.
He said this was caused after a client was erroneously entered into a Scottish Provident life policy, which resulted in him being chased for £2381.83 commission.
Mr Stewart said he asked for £2381.83, based on an hourly rate and phone bills, in February.
He claimed this has since been automatically deducted from commission payments on other products, but he has instead counterclaimed to be compensated for his time and effort in sorting out his client’s policy and dealing with Scottish Provident.
He said: “I was offered £220 in April to settle my complaint with no reason for how that was calculated. It seems as if IFAs have no recourse to be treated fairly.”
An order from District Judge Collier at Basildon County Court on 3 May, has stayed the claim until today (31 May) and said both parties must either settle or request an extension by 14 June.
Financial Adviser reported in March that Mr Stewart had complained about Scottish Provident after the firm cancelled his client’s direct debit for a life assurance policy by mistake and then took more than a year to reinstate the process.
The delay in reinstating the policy meant his client owed £2476.41 in missed premiums and opted out of the policy as he was unable to pay the money.
In September 2011, Scottish Provident paid Mr Stewart commission for a new policy but he said the client had not given the go-ahead.
He claimed Scottish Provident paid the sum despite knowing the client had not agreed to the new policy to be instated.
Mr Stewart said he has now been told by Scottish Provident to repay the sum.
He claimed he has made 36 telephone calls and written 19 letters to Scottish Provident to try and resolve the problem, but little had been done.
A spokesman for Scottish Provident said: “As it is an active legal case we cannot offer a comment on this at the moment.”