Court order to force end of joint life insurance?

[Ratherhaveacupofteaandabiscuit]

Can any solicitors please advise me on the legal route to end a joint life insurance policy which my ex husband is continuing against my will?

We divorced several years ago with a clean break agreement but for various reasons this policy (which has no surrender value) was not considered.

I originally took out the policy, which pays on the first death, back when we first got married and I paid all the premiums.

The beneficiary cannot be changed and the policy cannot be cancelled without his consent which he will never give because
he knows I now have stage 4 cancer so he is wanting the inevitable payout.

The insurance company is sympathetic but says their hands are tied.

The financial ombudsman says they cannot even investigate my complaint without my ex-husband's consent because he is named on the policy.

Is there some sort of court order which could force my ex-husband to agreeing to end the policy?

I have tried just stopping the monthly direct debit but he took it over.

It feels like he is actively investing in my death and I do not want him to profit.

This is a man who took a lot of money from me during our marriage and then wanted even more in the divorce.

He had an affair with my best friend when I was first diagnosed with cancer.

I think he has taken enough from me.

These are endowment, not 'whole life' or 'Term' policies

Not term assurance which the OP is talking about - why would companies buy up policies which are statistically not likely to ever be payable? Yes this applies to whole of life policies or those with a surrender value, but that isnt the case here.

the same principles are in play.

She can't cancel it.

Insurable interest only needs to exist at the start of the policy - then policies can be assigned and sold to others who can pay the premiums and receive death benefits

“Can any solicitors advise me….”

Yes they can. Call one up and pay for their advice like the rest of us.

Except she can cancel it if she can get the ownership assigned to her so it is no longer jointly owned, hence why people are advising her to see a solicitor. Third party assignment is of no relevance here for a number of reasons.

What a pleasant message to a victim of domestic abuse with stage 4 cancer. I hope you enjoyed typing that out.

It's quite clear he isn't going to do that FFS!

It's whole basis of the damn thread

Are you hard of thinking? Why do you think shes being advised to see a solicitor to apply for a court order?

Sorry if this has been suggested already - but can’t you get a male friend to ring up and pretend to be your ex to close the policy?
I know that’s obviously frowned upon, but he’s playing dirty! If a male phoned up who knew his details (presumably you could give them his DOB, address etc?) enough to pass the initial security checks, you could then end the policy over the phone, but change the corresponding address back to yours, so you receive the final post confirming the policy ending?
I had to do this with a phone contract - in my dad’s name but my phone - he was away so I found a willing male friend. Obviously different circumstance but if you know enough of his details to pass the security questions - it could work?
what an absolute arsehole of the biggest variety though!!!! I’m already cheering you on for an updated post where you can say the policy is void and the wanker gets zilch!!!

Not at all - what do you think a solicitor will do.

What the guy is doing is perfectly legal. He may be morally bankrupt but that's not the issue, or at least not the legal issue.

I love the idea of ringing up and cancelling !!!!!! Please do that!

Loving that my reply has been hidden because I made a joke of getting a posse together 😂

methinks Mumsnets AI bot is unaware of humour…

Well some of these replies have certainly given me a laugh, whether intentional or not, so thank you.

@LaurieFairyCake glad I got to read your reply before it was removed. Many of my friends have said the very same thing.

I won’t be getting anyone to impersonate him because that would be fraud although I appreciate the sentiment behind it.

Actually, he did this to his first wife. He got a woman to impersonate her on the phone to find out her bank balance and other financial details. This was a long, long time ago so none of the security stuff which exists now.

He also ripped her off when divorcing and selling their jointly owned buy to let property by convincing her not to use a solicitor so he was able to dictate what he would and wouldn’t give her from the proceeds.

He then paid her a pittance in child support and when she threatened him with the CSA (as it was back then) he said that if she did that he would just manipulate his books (self employed) to make it look like he earned nothing so she would end up with even less.

Unbeknownst to her for he was shagging the (married) next door neighbour whilst his wife babysat the next door neighbours children.

He really is a prince amongst men but if you met him you would never believe any of this at all because he is the ultimate wolf in sheep's clothing.