Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • OP stated they had been arrested, but not charged (let alone convicted). They DON'T have a criminal record, but do have an entry on the PNC. That information stays on the PNC (Police National Computer) for life, but doesn't get released in a standard DBS. It only MIGHT get released for an Enhanced DBS (eDBS) check  ... but it would be incredibly unlikely. (The rational behind this is that eDBS's allow for 'information at Chief Officer of Police's discretion' ..... this covers the 2 'barring lists' and is also intended for the scenario where someone has multiple arrests or investigations, where safeguarding is a concern .... it was brought in after the Soham murders / Ian Huntley case, where the information known about the now-convicted child murderer may have prevented his employment in a school, had it been made available). So, for the sake of accuracy and completeness, arrests stay on the PNC for life, wont appear in a standard DBS, MIGHT appear in an eDBS, but in reality, would be the exception rather than the norm, and I can't see them being released  to a defense barrister. What then if the defence found out a different way, and brought it up in court?. Again, unlikely, but the important feature is that the judge would make sure they trod very carefully!. They MIGHT consider using it if there were other factors that allowed them to try to cast doubts as to the truthfulness of your evidence, but on its own : No way. Anyone MIGHT be arrested (if a seemingly plausible complaint been made against them)! The approach to take if it did come up is to be truthful. "Yes, I was arrested. It arose from a vexatious complaint. I wasn't charged, let alone convicted. That could happen to any one of us, if a vexatious complaint gets made" Far better that than lying, saying you'd never been arrested, and getting caught in a lie : that would ruin your credibility. I'm incredibly doubtful it will even come up, though.
    • we dont get N157 because its new OCMC but no court dont have evidence either.   Just seems a bit of a pointless wait but oh well
    • Post #9 suggested some options to avoid or put off having a smart meter. Post #12 a simple solution to your complaint about the ay they handle fixed monthly DD. It's not really clear why you posted if you're going get irate when members "jump in" with suggestions. You can see what I'm referring to on "gasracker.uk" to allay your suspicion that I was lying in Post #16 which was made to correct ther misinformation shown in your Post #15
    • Back to octopus from the smart meter/tariff salesperson. Octopus have now said just ignore the letter - I dont have to have one despite there letter implying (at least) it was required, but that i will HAVE to have a smart meter if current meters stop working as 'their suppliers dont supply non smart meters any more'. They also say they do not/will not disable any smart functionality when they fit a smart meter I am of course going to challenge that. Thats their choice of meter fitter/supplier problem not mine
  • 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

GAP wont pay because of "modification"


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5186 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 everyone, after abit of advise and to see if this has happened to anyone else before. The story goes...

 

We brought a brand new car back in 2007 and took out GAP with the dealer, citroen.The underwriter of the GAP is The Warranty Group.

 

Over a month ago the car was written off when a 76 year old lady drove into the back of us when stationary at 40mph. We filled out all the appropriate forms and were told there were no problems with the engineers report and the only dispute was the amount our motor insurance was offering us.

 

We finally got to the stage where all we were waiting for was a cheque from GAP insurance only to be told we wont be getting anything as the car is modified, the modification being a subwoofer in the boot.

 

Now the terms and condition state....

 

" any vehicle which has been modified other than in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications"

 

will invalidate a claim but this is so vague i rang around other GAP providers and all of them said modifications dont include in-car entertainment even though there terms and conditions contain the exact same wording. I mean where do they draw the line, is a roof rack a modification, a child seat.

 

Ive even contacted the Business Development Director of The Warranty Group and he has confirmed that in-car entertainment is not classed as a modification. A modification is a change to the performance,shape,suspension,brakes etc..

 

The Warranty Group also underwrite RAC GAP cover, who also say in-car entertainment is not a modification.

 

We are going down the route of making a complaint in writing to The Warranty Group and also to the FOS.

 

Is there anything else we should be doing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the policy was taken out with Bristol Street Motor Scheme and the policy was underwritten by Aon at the time. All comunications and letters have been to The Warranty Group now as Aon seems to no longer exist.

 

They said they are going by what the indepedent engineers report said and its them that have told them the car is modified. We have requested a copy of this report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Bet You Have Requested A Copy

Have You Tried Asking The Garage Where The Report Was Done For A Copy On The Qt

 

I Had To Check As I Thought This Was Welcome Finance Rather Than Bristol Street

 

Sorry

 

Private Joke

Link to post
Share on other sites

The motor insurance company have it, they are waiting for our confirmation of there final offer before they dispose of the car. I need to check but i'm not sure if the GAP had there own inspection carried out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No not yet, its on the list of things to do. As far as we knew the warranty group had this report weeks ago and it wasnt untill last friday they decided they werent going to pay out.

 

I'll find out tomorrow how many inspections were carried out and try and get copies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had modifications on my Ford Focus ... Dealer fitted parking sensors (don't ask its a long story!) and my gap insurers wouldn't cover them. Everything else was fine and my claim was only reduced by £80.

I am told that Confused dot com now provide 'Car Depreciation Insurance' and that there is an option for Dealer Fitted Extra cover.

Link to post
Share on other sites

GAP only pays out for for manufacturer fitted extras if they are part of the invoice value, if you have dealer fitted extras after they cannot be claimed for but it doesnt invalidate your claim.

 

All other GAP companys ive contact state that in-car entertainment isnt a modification. Click4gap actually put this in there terms....

 

Vehicles fitted with Non Manufacturer specified modifications including but not limited to engine modifications; up-rated brakes, roll cages; steering column extension. Modifications such as alloy wheels, in-car entertainment, sat-nav, hands-free kit, roof rails, tow bar do not preclude the vehicle from being covered.

 

It seems its just TWG that think all the above are modifications and void your claim. They even said a tow bar or roof rack if fitted after the car left the factory is a modification and they wouldnt pay out.

 

I asked the business director of TWG this...

 

"Am I correct in thinking that all in-car entertainment such as additional speakers, amps, subwoofers, sat-nav etc would not invalidate a claim? And a modification is defined as something that alters the performance, suspension, brakes and safety of the vehicle"

 

His response was....

 

"However, to answer your question directly, you are correct. It is not the intention the policy to decline claims where the owner has upgraded their mobile phone kits, sat navs or stereos but it should be realised that unless these are factory ordered (i.e. built into the car by the car manufacturer at time of purchase) and therefore are invoiced, their value cannot be confirmed and are therefore not covered."

 

So basically the cost of the upgrades are not covered but it does not invalidate the claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so we finally have a copy of the vehicle inspection report from TWG. The report was carried out by DEKRA. They say they dont carry out these reports to find ways to invalidate claims but the report says...

 

"Please check for optional extras and any non-standard fittings or modifcations"

 

Followed by the cars details then a list of yes/no options for exterior,interior,electrical,gearbox.

 

Now the interesting part. Under inspection comments it reads....

 

"Todays inspection found this vehicle to be fitted with standard equipment apart from a high rear spoiler fitted to the tailgate." (spoiler was a factory fit option)

 

New line and paragraph....

 

"A FLI speaker box was fitted into the luggage area behind the right rear seat, this unit has a 1000 watt large speaker, the other side of the box could not be seen due to the unit being trapped behind the seat. Damage was seen to the unie with the large speaker being away from its fixing."

 

Now to me that says everything is fine and the report just points out the fact that there was a subwoofer fitted.

 

TWG told us that the engineer who carried out the report told them that the subwoofer was a modification and they were simply going on what the engineer had told them.

 

Next step is a complaint in writing to TWG and FOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

So we made a complaint by letter asking many questions as to why the claim was denied and basically got a poorly written letter back avoiding all the points we made and saying they denied the claim because the subwoofer that they cant proove was wired up although not visable may be audible and there fore putting the car in a higher insurance risk group.

 

In regards to the emails from Mr Whelan they ignored what we said and told us he's saying they will not be covered, yes the value wont be but it doesnt invalidate the policy.

 

We've now contacted the FOS as TWG cant and wont give us any straight answers. My main concern is there the only GAP underwritters that dont cover in-car entertainment so there must be thousands of policys out there that are worthless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can't prove it was wired up! So that means it could have been luggage in the boot. Are they suggesting then that the groceries from Asda are a modification.

 

I don't think I would be as patient as you have been. The policy does not say it is a modification, it has not change the car in any form or shape and I would now be threatening court action to let a judge decide.

 

Removing the air filter and adding ram pipe is a modification. This is just a blatant attempt to get out of paying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's clear there trying to pull a fast one. We've contacted the fos who will be writting to them on our behalf so we'll see what that turns up but in the mean time the very helpfull mr whelan has taken the claim details and I'm hoping to hear something back next week. Hopefully he will be able to shed some light and give us a straight answer to our enquires.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Just a quick update......

 

Had a phone call today from an adjudicator at the FOS today saying that TWG are in the wrong as far as he is concerned and he will be contacting them letting them know they should pay up.

 

Of course TWG now have the option to appeal which will then go onto then ombudsmen whos decision will be final. We shall sit tight and wait and see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...