Esure Family Legal Protection Advice

[nannamoon1]

Hi,

I am hoping someone can point me in the right direction please, we have home Insurance with Esure and we pay extra for Family Legal Protection.

We have been a victim of Telephone Banking Fraud & without going into too much detail (don't want to bore you) we have been advised to start proceedings against the bank for failing to protect our security & personal Identity details & plus we have to get a court order to obtain the recorded telephone calls as we can only have a transcript of the recordings.

We have contacted Esure as we have Family Legal Protection and low and behold they are saying that that we are not covered to take legal action for this issue, we asked "what are we covered for then" and we got "we assess each individual case and make a desision"

We have looked through our policy and all that it states is Family Legal Protection for up to £50,000 and nothing else, however we have gone through the Policy Booklet and it seems that we are covered, We have been told that they need to have a look at our policy and see if we have legal expense cover, I asked, well if we do not have legal expense cover what the hell is Family Legal Protection. We are going to receive a letter with the desision after they have looked into it.

Any advise would be much appreciated as to where do we stand.

[suecrill]

Hi
There are lots of imformed people on here who are able to offer you good sound advice, I am afraid I am not one of these but I would like to say good luck and have faith.
Regards
Sue

[nannamoon1]

Thanks Sue,

Hopefully someone will come along and give me some advice

[ian cognito]

"we assess each individual case and make a desision"

This seems a very odd way to run an insurance company! I would ask the FSA or Insurance Ombudsman if this is valid, I certainly haven't heard of insurance cover that is so ambiguous or even possibly none existent!

[Jimbo44]

Originally Posted by nannamoon1

....we assess each individual case and make a desision.

Or, put another way, "We will look at what you want us to pay for and decide it's outside the scope of your policy"!!!!

Seems decidedly dodgy to me!!!!

[nannamoon1]

Hi,

To quote the Esure policy booklet: The esure family legal protection policy is underwritten by DAS Expenses Insurance Company Ltd

This section of your policy applies if selected in your schedule, We agree to provide insurance in part E of the policy, subject to the terms, conditions and exclusions as long as:

the date of the insured incident happens during the period of cover within the territorial limit

any legal proceedings will be delt with by a court or other body which we agree to in the territoria limit

in civil claims it is always more likely that not an insured person will recover damages (or other legal remedy) or make a successful defence

For all insured incidents we will help in appealing or defending an appeal as long as the insured person tells us within the time limits allowed that they want us to appeal. Before we pay any costs and expenses for appeals, we must agree that it is more likely than not that the appeal will be sucsessful.

Insured incidents we will cover;

Employment disputes, contract disputes, bodily injury, property protection, tax protection, jury service, legal defence.

There are a few exclusions within the above, but none of which I believe would affect Esure not agreeing to offer legal protection.

Of course there is more in information in the booklet but none of which is relevant to me.

One assumes my claim against the bank would come under the contract disputes am I correct?

I confirmed with my other half what the Esure person told him and yes she said every case was assessed individually and did not think we were covered, she would have to go and look up our policy and check if we had expenses cover.

I have again read all of my policy and all it states is family Legal Protection "yes" £50,000 and nothing else written on the policy, hence we have read the booklet.

[ian cognito]

Contract disputes or property protection I would have thought as your money is covered if you get burgled (within limits).

It appears they are also only willing to cover you if you're guaranteed to win, which is exactly the same as the 'no win, no fee' companies and I may be wrong but I don't think you can ever guarantee a win in court, all down to the judge on the day.

If they don't agree to cover you on this I would certainly reconsider whether the cover is worth having. Having first hand experience of DAS cover on motor insurance and experience in insurance claiims, I don't take it if it is optional enymore though I notice more companies are making it compulsory and including it in the premium.

[mooreda]

Can you go back a bit and tell us a bit more about your dilemma? You say you have been the victim of some kind of fraud - what exactly has happened? Have you been reimbursed of the monies stolen from your account? If so, if you are still unhappy, have you not escalated your complaint to the Ombudsman before considering Legal Action?

[nannamoon1]

mooreda,

Yes we have been reimbursed with the funds, but that is not the point here, I will try to keep it brief, but feel free to ask questions.

The frausdter has used telephone banking to do 1 transfer on Sat 1 transfer on Sunday and on the Monday transfered on 6 separate occasions but within less than 12 hours then on the same day set up a S/O to a TSB account now initially the Fraud department told me that the fraudster would have know enough information i.e mothers maiden name, D.O.B., and the answer to the security question, to change the telephone banking pin to suit themselves number, we were told that they gather personal information then they are able to pass security.

We were told that the transfers were made within the same bank through the automated telephone banking, as this would mean they would not have to speak with anyone, but the S/O they would hve had to speak to an operater to set this up.

Our intial thoughts were how on earth would they gather this information, and accepted the banks explanation.

After the initial shock and after we had time to think, we realised that the pin could not have been changed as on the Monday when we noticed the transactions my husband rang the telephone banking and used his pin number, and his pin number is only in his head nowhere else.

This meant that the fraudster had rang 8 times and passed security every time, and what ceases to amaze us that on the last time which was the S/O set up the call centre person failed to suspect unusual activity, anyone with any common sense would have noticed this, on questioning the bank they had no answers, we have requested the actual recordings as we are not sure that the bank have conducted security, nor protected our identity and failed to spot unusal activity.

Also we have a very common surname and should the fraudster have an accent, this should have been spoted.

We have been told that we can not have the recordings, we can only have a trascript copy, which is no use really as they can edit the parts they feel free to do, but we have asked for the transcript to be certified as a true copy.

The reason for this uncertainty with the bank is we have since learnt that friends have forgotten their pin or password and the operater at the call centre has either prompted them which they are not allowed to or they have virtually told them by means of well the first letter is X the 3rd is X and the last in X, we also know that the branch has ordered a replacement debit card when the card holders parent went in and requested a new one.

We can only get to listen to the recordings, if we get a court order, we are just convinced that the bank have not followed proceedures correctly. this is high value fraud as well, and yes we have got a crime number.

[mooreda]

i really do feel for you and the frustration caused - my brother over the past week has been a victim of fraud - he had over £1000 stolen from his account in separate transactions made in Canada.

what you need to ask yourself is it worth pursuing the matter any further. as long as you have got your money back, do you really want the additional hassel of fighting the bank or do you have a specific thing in mind that you are hoping to achieve from fighting the bank - i.e. financial recompense. to claim on your legal insurance, any claim that you wish to make, must have a reasonable chance of success (this will be written into the terms). If not, then it is unlikely the legal insurance would take the matter up anyhow.

if you are unhappy with the bank, why not move?

[mooreda]

so really, what i am trying to say, that is even if you were covered by your legal insurance, is it something they would taken on as your claim would have to have merit and substance to which it would have a reasonable change of success.

[nannamoon1]

mooreda,

Firstly thanks for the replies, the amount that was taken from our bank was £4,500, I just feel that if I do not pursue with going down the legal route and move on, if the bank has failed security etc which I am of the opinion that they have, then other customers accounts are at risk.

Yes we are changing banks. Once we get the trascript, I am going to contact the Ombudsman. Why shoulda bank not be questioned about their security, after all if the boot were on the other foot I am sure very peice of evidence would be shown...

We are not bothered about being compensated, its is just the fact we believe that the bank are at fault and why should it be brushed under the carpet.

[louandgra]

As a legal expense insurance provider I fail to see what you are attempting then?

Maybe if you hadn't be recompensed your provider may well have provided assistance.

What legal proceedings do you wish them to bring against an organisation who has put you back in the same position you were before the crime?

[demon_x_slash]

I think the whole point of nannamoon's actions is to highlight the poor security that allowed the fraud to take place - it's a claim to highlight negligence and bad practice, and to effect a change - you can't be against that, lou, surely?

[louandgra]

No I am not against that at all. The thread is about poor service supporting a particular legal expense product.

The legal expense provider is merely saying that they cannot provide cover to bring a class action against a bank for not providing uber-secure banking. First of all, any case brought under the policy would have to possess a better than even chance of success and I am pretty sure that the insurance product is limited to the policy holder. In this instance Nannamoons losses are nil, apart from the stress and anxiety it may have caused which has a nil quantum value.

This is a crime and not actionable as a consumer dispute. Ok if the bank didnt reimburse then he/she would have a case under the terms & conditions of internet and telephone banking, but to ask a legal expense provider to undertake a wasteful journey championing the cause of someone who hasnt suffered a loss is just laughable. I am sorry.

Fraudulent activity is becoming more sophisticated and unfortunately sometimes organisations cannot provide any resolve to the security lapse until after they have learnt or suffered from it. I am pretty sure the banks are doing their utmost best to do something about it because I would imagine they can't stomach handing out £4500 to everyone on frequent occasions.

To the original point about the complaint against Esure, as you can tell, I am a legal expense provider and we provide a brilliant service and wonderful products only to receive numerous complaints from consumers whose expectations are far beyond what was promised in a Key Facts Policy Summary.

I propose writing to your bank instead or campaigning to your MP.

[nannamoon1]

Deman,

You are quite correct in what you say regarding, the banks poor security, the bank in question had failed to protect our Identity, not performed security checks correctly, leading to the suspect to now having all our Identity details, free to obtain credit etc. We have a Solicitor dealing with the case, seemingly he has some evidence to prove they are at fault.

Esure have not had the courtesy to write and say that we are not covered for this type of claim, although they said they would make a decision and write to us. The person we initially spoke to made a comment "we look at each individual case" laughable really

It appears also whatever the claim, you have to be sure to win, this can never be guaranteed whatever the claim, all down to the judge on the day!!

Most Insurance companies, are the same, happy to take your premium, but not happy should you want to make a claim, It would not appear so bad, if when you rang, you got a person whom could guide you, and follow up what they promised.

[louandgra]

ok, but what is your loss?

What is your solicitor attempting to recover?

In terms of the chances of succeeding - the legal profession work from success matrix to establish whether your chances are better than even.

Unfortunately the legal profession are under a strict guidelines (and zero chance of recovering costs!) to not lead clients on in the event they feel the client has a fruitless claim so unfortunately they cannot wait to see which judge they get on the day - it doesn't work like that im afraid as the court system would be clogged full of claims without merit.

The No Win - No Fee system curtails merit less claims as a solicitor is very unlikely to take cases on that end up costing him money. The balance of access to justice has tipped from a better than even chance of success to a 95% chance of success unfortunately. Money is always overriding factor im afraid.

I hate banks myself, they are scum and I do appreciate what you say and I understand entirely as I have been through a similar thing myself but I wouldnt waste any more of your energy unless you have suffered a loss and you can also evidence someones negligence.