View more on these topics

Equitable action group claims Treasury refused policyholder database

Treasury.gif

The Equitable Members Action Group claims the Treasury has refused to use an updated database of 322,000 Equitable Life policyholders it supplied to speed up compensation payments.

The Times reports that the Treasury has cited data protection issues, claiming the policyholders included in the database did not give their consent for their details to be passed on. This is disputed by Emag’s lawyers.

Emag says it fears that thousands more Equitable Life policyholders could die before they receive compensation.

Last year, the Treasury outlined a £1.5bn compensation deal for one million policyholders.

A freedom of information request, submitted by a policyholder, shows that only 777 payments had been made so far to Equitable customers.

The Government has pledged to pay £500m to policyholders by April and contact all one million policyholders by June.

An Emag spokesman told The Times: “Emag is disgusted at the cynicism and incompetence of the Treasury in failing to deliver a scheme they promised after the election.

“While Mark Hoban blunders about, many thousands more policyholders will die before the first cheque even reaches them.”

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. The Coalition cheated me when they put in the sneaky little clause to refuse any compensation to anyone whose Equitable Life pension fund was started before 1992. It was in 1987 when my final salary fund was transferred from my employer to Equitable Life. Equitable’s offer was a pension of around £14,000 which could be drawn some time after 2009. I have not drawn anything at all yet so my investment has stayed with Equitable from 1987 to this day. The fund has done so badly that their current quote of what they would actually pay me is now around £1,400, a loss of 90%! How can I possibly have “benefited from the mutual’s propensity to over-bonus” ??

    The hypocrisy of Mark Hobden when he says publicly that he has been looking after the older pensioners first, but in reality he has put in a pre-1992 exclusion which cuts them all off at the knees!

  2. I might have guessed that nincompoop hoban was somewhere in the situation. Anything he deals with turns to cac.

Leave a comment