Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Our price is the same all day, but varies day to day. Yes there's a risk of high prices but it has never gone above SVR any time since I signed up. Last 30 days average 17.67p/kWh, max 20.67 and lowest was 11.83.  It saved just under £300 during 2023.  
    • It you had E7 in the past but have converted to single rate then the meter will still hold the last recorded Night readings. This introduces scope for error when manually reading. If the meter has only ever been used on single rate then there's only one figure that can be taken. For example ours shows "Rate 1" reading and a "Total import" reading, but they both give the sme figure. If it has ever been on E7 the total will be higher, including the retained night reading.
    • okay, perfect and thank you so much for the help once again. so firstly i am going to initiate the breathing space, during this time it's likely ill receive a default. when i receive the default are you aware of how long it will take for me to know whether the OC have sold it off to DCAs? Once it's with the DCAs i do not need to worry as they cannot issue a CCJ only the OCs can Even if i decide to come an arrangement with the DCAs no point as the default will remain for 6 years paid or not paid I should only consider repayment if the OC still won the debt and then issue a CCJ? Just to confirm the default will not be seen after 6 years? No one can tell I had one then after 6 years ill be all good?
    • I'm not sure we were on standard tariffs - I've uploaded as many proofs as I can for the ombudsman - ovo called last night uping the compensation to 100 from 50 pounds for the slip in customer service however they won't acknowledge the the problem them not acknowledging a fault has caused nor are they willing to remedy anything as they won't accept the meter or formula was wrong.   I'd appreciate more details on the economy 7 approach and I'll update the ombudsman with any information you can share. 
    • To re-iterate and highlight my urgent question on this one: The N24 from the court did not include any instructions to submit paperwork 28 days before the date, unlike the N157 received for other smaller claims. Do I have to submit a WS for this court date? Link has!...
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Nationwide Contents Insurance Claim


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5892 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I'm hoping that someone could give me some advice, as I am now stuck and really don't know what to do.

 

My bath cracked when my partner was having a shower and water leaked over the floor etc. As i've been suffering from an illness for the last year, we decided to claim on the contents insurance, as it would be less stress than doing it ourselves. Well that's what we thought!

 

We paid £50 excess and the builders turned up for 3 days of work. They then said on the second day that they would be back some time to finish the job, as they had only been told to work 2 days not three. This was the contractors fault and we have been waiting 2 weeks with half a bathroom. I've been ringing up Nationwide's claim advice line, and the contractors have been waiting on a decision from the insurance company over what to do about the tiles that they ripped off the wall to remove the bath. The tiles are not made any more and we've searched everywhere and cannot find anything similar, as they have a speckled and then glazed finish. We can't even find tiles the same size. Nationwide have now said that they agree to replacing the tiles up to the daido border tiles (half way up the walls) but my partner and I have to pay 50% of the cost of the tiles and labour which is going to be about £1,000, and we just can't afford that. I specifically asked the insurance assessor if the tiles could be refitted and he said yes, though i dont have this in writing. So now i have half a floor, a new bath with bin bags gaffer taped around it to protect the walls were there are no tiles and the only thing Nationwide will do, is charge us £1000 to replace the bottom half of all the tiles that will be a different size and wont match the top half. But as we can't afford it, it looks like i'm going to be left with a half finished bathroom. Nationwide just say that it's their policy to only offer 50% of the cost and they just wont budge.

 

If anyone could offer some advice, i would most grateful, as i'm at the end of my coping ability with this.

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but I think your insurers are correct.

 

I'll just summarize my understanding and if there is any part of this that is incorrect then let me know.

 

1) Bath cracked whilst in use. There was no external force or impact.

 

2) The insurers agreed to replace the bath and repair any damage caused as a direct result of the water leakage from the bath.

 

3) As a consequence of removing the damaged bath, tiles were removed, undamaged, by the contractor.

 

What I don't understand is why the original tiles cannot be replaced. If they were removed carefully then they should go back.

 

What you need to consider, and I know this sounds harsh, is it reasonable to expect the insurers to pay to completely re-tile your bathroom. Insurance is based on reinstatement i.e. restoring what you had prior to any insured peril. For you to have a completely retiled bathroom would give you more than the insured risk. It isn't their fault that the tiles are no longer available and I think that offering you 50% of the total cost is probably beyond the terms of the policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I think you will find that is correct,I also had an insurance claim,due to water flooding the kitchen,only some of the units were damaged,as they were about 13 years old,they couldn't find a match for them so the Insurers paid for the damaged units plus 50% of the undamaged ones we had to pay the rest.

 

Sorry if that's not what you want to hear,believe me I know how you feel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies. The bath cracked when my partner stepped back in the bath. So the insurance agreed that it was accidental damage. The assessor that came round said that the tiles taken off would be put back so that no new tiles were needed. I was quite specific about asking if that could be done because they are special tiles. He said that the contracted company would be replace them. However the builder damaged damaged tiles when he took out the bath and fitted a new one. I know that they are responsible for replacing the tiles they damaged but i can't see how it can be acceptable to replace them with entirely different tiles. It ends up being a very expensive insurance claim that we can't afford, so will be stuck with a half finished bathroom and black bin bags gaffer taped to walls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I can suggest is that you go back to the insurers and ask for a copy of the assessors report but bear in mind they are not obliged to supply it to you.

 

It's a very long shot but if the assessor considered it practical to remove and replace the tiles and was specific in his instruction to the contractor about this then there MAY be some comeback on the contractor but I really don't hold out much hope of either the insurers or the contractor paying the full amount to retile the bathroom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Runners,

 

Under ABI (association of brit. insurers) guidelines, the role of the insurer in the event of a claim is, as previously stated, reinstatement.

 

the insurer MUST reinstate your position as it was prior to the claim. You cannot be left 'worse off' in terms of repairs/replacement than you were prior to this.

 

I would advise the insurer you are going to contact ABI and FOS (ombudsman), as you have advice regarding there responsibility, contrary to what they have advised, if they still dont budge, contact FOS & ABI.

 

Hope this helps

AB123uk

 

IF MY COMMENTS ARE USEFUL, PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES!

 

Halifax Staff Current Account WON

Lloyds WON

Yorkshire WON

Halifax Staff Visa WON

 

 

If CAG Helped you..... Why not help CAG!

Click Donate at the top of the forum!

Oyster- I fought the Lloyds will have it's mark in history- have you downloaded your Official Charges Track?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the insurer MUST reinstate your position as it was prior to the claim. You cannot be left 'worse off' in terms of repairs/replacement than you were prior to this.

 

Agreed but they have no obligation to make your position better than it was prior to the loss so to ask the policyholder for a contribution in these circumstances is entirely reasonable and standard practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Durr! Think I was having a dumb minute... As RP states, Nationwide aren't being unreasonable in asking for you to contribution, i think we can safely say any insurer would do so

AB123uk

 

IF MY COMMENTS ARE USEFUL, PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES!

 

Halifax Staff Current Account WON

Lloyds WON

Yorkshire WON

Halifax Staff Visa WON

 

 

If CAG Helped you..... Why not help CAG!

Click Donate at the top of the forum!

Oyster- I fought the Lloyds will have it's mark in history- have you downloaded your Official Charges Track?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Lots of companies charge people for not paying by direct debit is that ok too?

 

This seems unfair as the customer IS in a worse position. But for the actions of the builder the tiles would be fine. There must be some comeback to someone?

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the advice, i went down the route of the assessor stating that no tiles had to be taken off. I had the works assessment report, which actually stated this too. In the end (after a lot of delays on the insurance company side) they have agreed to a cash settlement of £900.

 

It's taken a lot of effort to keep on at the insurance company, but it seems if you persevere, it's worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"but it seems if you persevere, it's worth it."

 

Something I find myself wondering more and more is how widespread this low balling technique is which companies use. A friend of a friend who works in insurance once said it was wise to always reject the first offer.

 

I think it is very likely lots and lots of people are losing out because they just accept what companies say. I had someone tell me that nothing could be done about charges for cancelling insurance. She had tried with home ins and got nowhere. So far I've gotten 50% back on my car insurance and the Ombudsmen are now looking at it.

 

Good news on your victory, if something feels wrong the it probably is!

The views I express here are mere speculation based on my experience. I am not qualified nor insured to give legal advice and any action you take will be at your own risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to insurance forum.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...