Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
I am currently on holiday and have had a major burst due to frozen pipes.
My mortgage advisor was Countrywide who informed me building insurance was compulsory to obtain a mortgage, they are deducting insurance from me under direct debit under CAIS COLL.
Oakwood Homeloans the lender has also increased my premiums by 28 pounds a month without my permission as they also state building insurance is compulsory.
Now I am in the position I need to make a claim, Countrywide are willing to cover me for contents yet Oakwood Homeloans are claiming they are only insuring me for redundancy.
I'm not trying to make 2 claims but I am now in a position of paying 2 insurance companies and none of them willing to provide the 'compulsory' building insurance they stated.
Certainly with the Oakwood scenario I could get a quote for building and redundancy cover for less than what they are charging me and they did add this on without my permission or knowledge.
Surely I have been mis-sold an inappropiate product, please can you advise.
My home insurance policies are with my mortgage company. Can I switch?
Typically, you are free to switch to the company of your choice. Check your mortgage agreement to make sure you don't need to tell your lender before you take out a new policy. You may be able to save money by switching.
Request the original insurance proposal from both companies, check if you requested buildings insurance on either. If you did and they never added it then this may be a strong enough point to bring up in a complaint.
I will requested a copy of the original insurance proposal from both companies by email with no response grom either, I will follow this up by requesting the same by registered post.
I have a letter from Oakwood dated 11th November 2008 that attempts to justify the increase in payments by £28 by quoting
“we require sight of a full insurance schedule in order to establish whether or not you have adequate building insurancein place.
It is our policy to ensure customers have adequate building insurance in place at all times, in order to protect our mutual interests in the event of a loss. We therefore undertook to write to all of our customers and request a copy of their current building’s insurance schedule, to ensure adequate cover is in place. I’m sure you will agree we are acting responsibly by ensuring our security is properly protected.”
my house has a defective/blocked gutter system and it has damged the Eaves soffit and due to water leakage on to the external brick wall, there are now damp patches in areas and rooms below where the blockages are in the form of damp patches. I know that the gutter may be delined for repair as explained under tear and wear but the blockages in the pipes is not due to tear and wear. The question is Am I entitled to claim for damage to the external wall, which would require some treatment under buildings content insurance?
if repair work has commenced etc i assume Oakwood must have approved it as cover was in place. Request that call is listened too etc,also ask why they have they logged a claim if no cover and authorised? seem odd they should call you if no cover?
Insurance mis-sold refusing to accept claim
and have had a major burst due to frozen pipes.
Reply With Quote