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 have had some water damage in my hallway which has caused my laminate flooring to become warped.
I have contacted my insurance who have agreed to replace the flooring.
However my problem is that the laminate flooring is in one large piece which runs into the lounge and the two bedrooms of my flat.
I purposely laid the flooring so that it joined in the hall and lounge as i didn't want to have a doorbreak and because although there is a door (which is always open) it looks much better if it all flows together.
The insurance company firstly said that they wouldn't replace the whole thing and that the flooring would have to be cut at the doorways. I said that I am prepared to accept that for the bedrooms but not for the lounge as that would look stupid. I am not prepared to accept that for the lounge. They have now said that I need to pay half to have them join the lounge.
I thought that my insurance would replace like with like. By cutting the flooring and replacing the hallway only, which won't match, isn't going to look the same. So that isn't like for like is it? Why should I pay extra to have my flat looking the way it did before the water damage? Isn't that what I pay insurance for?
Where do I stand with this? Any advice gratefully recieved.
I dont have any real expertise in insurance but my thoughts would be that as the flooring is joined all the way through it is all one item - so to replace like for like would involve replacing the whole thing (bedroom and lounge incl).
The fact the offered to join the lounge if you paid for half suggests they are aware of this.
Did you do pay extra for the flooring to have it all joined?
No I didn't pay any extra but it just looks much better when it is all joined together rather than seperating each room. Expecially since it will be completely different flooring!!!
I have a rather complicated situation that is ongoing with a car insurance firm, who will remain nameless as I am soon going to inititiate legal proceedings.
I had my car insured on the basis that my 4 years no claims bonus from Feb 2006 (that I had told them about) would be included as a discount next year, making 5 years no claims next year. The insurance cost about £700, but I didn't mind as next year would be cheaper (or so I thought...).Anyway, having sent the old no claims detais to them I then got told (by letter not over the phone as previously) that I now would have to pay an extra premium of about £150, a whopping £850 and my no claims now being rejected!
Needless to say, I cancelled the poilcy and awaited a reimubursement. Their comapny had told me in writing that the policy was cancelled in Nov 2009. To date I have spoken to various people at the company and simply been fobbed off with nonsense. I have written a letter that includes an excerpt of their cancellation policy and await their reply within 7 days. I also foolishly tried to get my Bank to treat the case as fraud / disputed transaction but they are just wasting time, these financial organisations are in cahoots. The money was taken from my account in Oct 2007!
As I am sure that I will not get a response my next letter will be to initiate legal proceedings in the small claims court.
It amazes me how little control we have over the money that is supposed to be ours.
Good luck to all that are struggling against thes financial industry gangsters.
Insurance Advice
Reply With Quote
