Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I am a local authority tenant and was in a 3 bed house. At the end of last year, my last child moved out and so did my spouse as we are now going through a divorce which meant that I was in the house alone and decided that I needed to downsize not only for myself but to offer the property to a family that needed it. I registered on the local authority housing bidding site as i was asked to do and I was accepted and given a priority banding as I was downsizing and they were desperate for my house. I have been extremely lucky and after about 6 weeks was accepted for a new build from a housing association via the housing gateway. I viewed the property 2 weeks ago and had to sign the tenancy last week when they were doing bulk signups for the houses and that is the day I moved. In between viewing and sign up, I contacted my current local authority landlord and asked how I give notice as I had been accepted for a property I had bid on and was moving.  The lady told me how to do it online and then said that I needed to give a full weeks notice which wasnt a problem as I had enough time.  (I was also told a weeks notice was what i would need to give by another staff member about a month ago when I phoned up for another housing related question.  I dont have any of this in writing.) I have now moved, handed back the keys and I am now being told that I need to give 4 weeks notice which I cannot afford. I hav e spoken to the council again explaining that I was told a week and that to be honest, if I knew they were going to charge me 4 weeks I would not have been able to move and would have stayed in the other house.  I thought I was doing the right thing. They said that calls are recorded and they asked me when I called in and was told a week and they would listen to the telephone conversation and if it was correct what I was told, they would see what they could do to reduce the notice period. They have now emailed me back and said that they have listened to the conversation and the lady said 4 weeks notice and I am liable for 4 weeks rent.  Now I may well of misheard her when I thought she said a full weeks notice she may have said 4 weeks notice but I am sure she said a full weeks notice and i was told a week by another member of staff a few weeks ago. I have emailed her back and said that I may of misheard but I would like to listen to the phone recording myself.  As yet they havent responded. I think its unreasonable for them to make me give 4 weeks when I had to sign the new tenancy with little notice or loose the property.  And it was all done through their gateway, and they will have a tenant in there pretty much straight away getting rent from them. I am on a very low income, I am on my own, I have serious medical issues and I am really getting myself stressed out over this. Any advice would be so appreciated.  Can I insist they let me listed to the recording? RH  
    • Susan Crichton is at the Inquiry today. She seems to have trouble remembering a lot of things but seems to find it easier if it's something that shows her in a good light.
    • Send them a letter of claim straightaway. No point hanging around. Given 14 days in the letter of claim and if they haven't paid you by then, issue the claim on day 15. The amount of time is more than adequate for them to get going. Post your draft letter of claim here. A look at. Then log onto the MoneyClaim website and start preparing your claim and post your particulars of claim here for us to have a look at. Don't bluff. No point in it.
    • That's what we thought, but the store manager is inferring that, as the jeweller we used was not a member of the NJA, no one  would give what he said, any credence. The Jeweller we used is in fact, a long established, well respected company, with 2 store and rather than just being a retailer, they craft the most exquisite jewellery inhouse!  I wish my Fiancé would have bought from them rather than H Samuel! Do you think we do need to get another report from and NJA accredited Jeweller ?
    • Really pleased that you won. UKPC know that you have supremacy of contract but still they persist because so many motorists blindly pay them.   Muppets.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 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

charley vs lloyds contents insurance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5416 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

hi has anyone successfully had a premium refund upon finding out your not covered for the very thing you take for granted accident cover etc when if you had been explained this , you would of never switched to them in the first place , and they called you in the first place too what a con they had several years of premiums steadiky increasing for no apparent reason double con and when something breaks ie a heated towel rail breaking free from its fixings and falling of the wall causing the bottom pipes to break and spew water all over. tel em and they gave me the news affraid your not covered sir can this be right surely you would expect this cover or am i wrong :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow - seven lines and not a single full stop! Can you state what the actual problem is and what led up to it? Please try and use some punctuation or just bullet point the facts - your post there is a tad difficult to follow :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI gyzmo , yes sorry about that, over zelous. and new to typing .

well we came home one evening out, and herd an almighty crash ,ran upstairs and found the towel rail on the floor water everywhere . it had come of the fixings and broke the bottom two pipes and flooded bathroom floor , luckily we cleared it up and managed to bung up the pipes and stop the flow, telephoned lloyds whom ive had the premium with and the first thing they said was sorry your not covered for accidental cover bla bla so i switched to another company after moaning and cancelled policy useless as it was, am cheesed of because had i of known your not covered for this ,i would of never of taken out said policy, and they telephoned me one day many moons ago to sell the dam policy too . i am in my fortys and all the policys i have had covered you for this eventuality and was considered normal, my question is can i possibly get some sort of refund from this lot mis sold mis representation or something . many thanks gyzmo and sorry for last post:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple answer to that is NO you cannot now ask for a refund.

 

Your insurers quoted a premium and you accepted it, you will have received a policy document which detailed exactly which perils were covered. If you were unhappy that accidental damage was not covered then the time to do something about it was when you received the policy document, they have neither mis-sold or mis-represented anything to you.

 

Just because other policies you may have had in the past covered accidental damage is no guarantee that any new policy you take out will also cover it.

 

My advice would be to always thoroughly check any policy you are considering taking out BEFORE you take it, ask any salient questions and then check the policy wording when it arrives.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you mossycat, i know where your coming from and your right but i do think that in this day and age to be had over by a large company such as this ,is bad, i think i speak for most people who are approached this way, you simply do not question there integrity because of the fact that they are big and reputable so there fore you do feel safe that your covered, to expect everyone to read the small print in the busy world we live in is nonsense , its 2009 not 1949 and to try and catch people out in this way is more aurther daly than lloyds reputable insurance company , my current policys does cover me for accidental damage because it was stipulated and my buildings insurance combined with the contents is now cheaper than the one contents policy i had with them. i know you should read the small print now, and i am of the nature of nothing ventured nothing gained and on this basis i will contest this with them to the best of my novice ability , hassle ing them might get me somewhere so i will try and i ll keep posting till i get the last no out of them , thank you .:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well I Feel Better Now Ive Sent Off A Mad Letter Ref This Company And The Duping Of Customers Over The Tel And Running On A Load Of Cobblers And Not Telling Them In Simple Terms That They Are Not Covered Should Any Thing Of Value Break, Who Takes A Policy Out Not To Have This Covered , See What I Get Back:d

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm I take it there was not damage to the bathroom by the water?

Yes you may not be cover to re-attach the broken tower rail and pipes but you would be cover for any resultant damage caused to flooring by the escape of water (EOW). EOW is normally described as:

 

"Water escaping from water tanks,

pipes, equipment or

fixed heating systems."

 

Even if you had Accidental Damage (AD) cover to your buildings, they would need to determine the cause of damage, if it was found to be wear & tear then it would have been declined also under the exclusion:

 

"Damage caused by wear and tear, settlement, shrinkage,

vermin, insects, fungus, weather

conditions or anything that

happens gradually."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , Had A Standard Response Letter Back , Which Serves A Purpose As To What They Have Regarding This Issue, Ive Now Replied Ref Their Reply , Having Broken It Down In My Reply So We Will See , Worth A Go For The Cost Of Postage:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

just to keep you informed, three leeters from them so far and i am not giving up till i get a result, am presently studying there original cover regs etc , they ve told one large porky so far , wont say any more till complete with a victory or without :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you could post up exactly what happened and exactly what was damaged (and by what, ie water or impact etc), we'll see if we can assist you. Also post details of exactly what your insurers are saying.

 

Mossy

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...