Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Agree it is not a modification that needs to be disclosed to Insurers as changing the seats has not changed the risk.  
    • Frpm David Frost and Robert Jenrick: 'Conservatives must show we respect the votes in 2016 and 2019 and not give the Opposition the chance to undo the benefits of leaving the EU'   Sweep away the Brexit gloom – or Labour will unravel a huge gain ARCHIVE.PH archived 22 Apr 2024 05:47:50 UTC  
    • Please please help we were miss sold full fibre by EE July 22  Install couldn’t go ahead no equipment sent and no. Survey it was hell  foind out no full fibre in road so we had to go back to cooper no choice we involved. Ceo and they put in a man from customer resolution s  he was vile he told me I had to go to engineers  something very odd about the ex resolution s in bt basically they took my drive up said they Would put ducting in ready for full fibre we have got £ 40 for a hours upon hours phones stress and more told to go to ombudsman  then bill was £35 we called twice told it was that price as they had treated us appalling two weeks later all sky package gets pulled we call again our bill goes to 165 the next two weeks was hell trying to get yo bottom why it’s off our package it was all on in the end I spent a day on the phone  341 mins was the call anyway I got to the bottom it was this resolution man coveting up the other issue another deadlock  to cover it all up  they hide data  ee did so couldn’t get the miss sell in writing I have now only from sept  Basically now we tried getting full fibre and they have found my drive had to be taken up again which has sunk .  The engineer has placed the wrong ducting again under my drive and need s to be taken to again apparently and the pipe sticks up middle of the drive near gate not behind look so odd it’s a big as a drain pipe open to water and it’s below touching the electrical cables to hot tub . I was sent a letter from the ex resolution to say I had stopped the work  I haven’t  it’s so sadistic she covering up for her mate in that team as the orginal install he didn’t check it had been done correctly  I took to Twitter and posted on open reach they ignored me then after 3 calls of two weeks they sent a engineer bt ignored me ceo emails blocked tag on Twitter unanswered then we get someone from twitter send a engineer he written report to say it’s dangerous since we have  had a  letter to say our problem can not be resolved  then a email to say sorry we are leaving and we can’t get into our account Bt will not talk to us ofcom tells us nothing they can do Citzens advice said go to the police  we can’t go back to virgin due so mass issue with them only option is sky  but point is they make out we have canceled we haven’t we have this mess on our drive dangeous work we are in hell  it’s like she covering up for this collegue it’s all very odd I am disabled and they like played mentaly with me open reach say bt resolved the issue no they have not  I recon they have terminated us making our we have  to hide it from mgt  Help it’s hell I don’t sleep we have 29 may we have tried  calling they just ignore me  at first they are so lovely as they say I am then they go to nnamager and say we can’t say anything to you end call  Scared police are rubbish I need help even typing is so painfull  Thankyou  anyone hello be so grateful     
    • There's a thread somewhere about someone sending the baillifs against Wizzair that is quite hilarious. I would love to see someone do the same to Ryanair. Question is, should you be the one to take that role. You are entitled to the £220, if your flight was from the UK. If it was TO the UK I suppose it is more of a grey area... though the airlines I know have been using £220 as standard. Not that surprising for Ryanair, the worst cheapskates in the universe, to go for the lower amount, and if you forward this to the CEO he will probably have a jolly good laugh and give his accountants a verbal bonus. After all he's the one who said and I paraphrase "F*** our customers, they'll fly with us again anyway". While we would all love to see Ryanair get wooped in court again, I have to join my fellow posters in thinking it's not worth the hassle for (hypothetically) £7 and not sure it will expedite the payment either. It's already an achievement that you got them to accept to pay.
    • The US competition watchdog has taken legal action to stop Tapestry's $8.5bn takeover of rival Capri.View the full article
  • 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

insurer won't pay for lost ring, please help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4610 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, i am very upset having lost my engagement ring :(. The loss adjuster has just visited me and said the only problem he can forsee is the ring not being insured as it was purchased in the USA in 2005 and we don't have proof of having declared it at customs upon bringing it into the UK. He says there is statute / case law on this, but couldn't give me the details and I have google searched to no avail:confused:.

 

Obviously Esure have accepted my premiums for this ring and have the valuation as proof of its existence and value, i have checked their policy and scrutinised their documentation but nowhere does it mention jewellery being bought abroad. I followed their procedure to the letter i.e. it is insured for accidental loss / damage and is a specified item on the policy.

 

Can anyone please help??

Edited by missy100
mistake in grammar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait until you get a reply from the insurers, I've never heard of an insurer refusing to pay out on something that was purchased abroad that hadn't been subject to UK import taxes.

 

I'd expect the insurer to deal with the claim, so I think you are worrying over nothing

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope so thank you, I've been ill since losing it and now feel worse but yes, I should wait and see. He was very certain though despite not being able to quote the caselaw he referred to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't heard of such a case(s) either. I have been racking my brain trying to see where the claims inspector is trying to go with this and the only thing I think he might be trying to suggest is under a principle called ex turpi causa non oritur damnum (of which there are plenty of cases).

 

This is where a claim is made by the Claimant, but the claim is founded on an illegality i.e. in your case, claiming for a ring bought in the USA but no excise duty paid ( I am not saying this is what they will state or plead against you -just a thought).

 

However, in order to repudiate your claim, they would have to, in essence, plead that you had committed a number of illegal acts, which are serious allegations to bring and can't imagine a claims handler making such allegations due to the ramifications of a counter claim for defamation.

 

Personally I think the claims inspector is talking rubbish.

 

I would do what Mossycat says and just see what your insurers say and wouldn't worry too much. If they come back to you with any sort of rubbish then let us know what they say.

Edited by Endymion
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, hadn't heard anything from loss adjuster so enquired where claim was up to and now have received a letter advising i am to have a second visit from a loss adjuster, does anyone know whether this is normal or not and what it would entail? I am having to take time off work and they are asking me to have the same information ready that I provided to the first loss adjuster, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, hadn't heard anything from loss adjuster so enquired where claim was up to and now have received a letter advising i am to have a second visit from a loss adjuster, does anyone know whether this is normal or not and what it would entail? I am having to take time off work and they are asking me to have the same information ready that I provided to the first loss adjuster, thank you.

 

This is a bit unusual but I have known it to happen before for various reasons, you should press your insurer for an explanation as to why another adjusters report is required.

 

I have never heard of an insurer making exclusions for items purchased abroad. Did you have the ring specifically insured? Some insurers insist that higher value items are added to the policy on top of normal cover. They may refuse to cover an item, or apply a ceiling to the settlement, if no additional cover existed.

 

NOTE** The original loss adjuster was talking out of turn, and more than likely talking nonsense too. He should not be discussing matters with you as he has no authority to settle your claim or otherwise... his job is to provide an assessment for the insurers consideration.

Edited by Itokuzu
Added info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be concerned about a second visit. There are a lot of fraudulent claims being made, probably down to the economic downturn, so Insurers are being extra cautious before they look to settle claims.

 

It could be that they are testing you, to see how you react. I have known in the past for some claimants to suddenly drop a claim, when a bit of pressure is applied.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for your replies, the ring is insured separately on the policy and they are only dealing with the claim when i prompt them - it seems like they are trying to get out of paying for it. I was just confused about a second adjusters visit as there is nothing more i could add to the first visit, the loss adjusters are Cunningham Lindsay if this makes any difference or anyone has had dealings with them? I am very upset as it makes me feel that insurance is not worth the paper its written on when you need it, but they're quite happy to accept premiums for the pleasure! Plus it's now 2 months since i lost the ring and am unable to get a replacement! I don't even think they have supplied the first report to the insurance company and am considering requesting a copy of it........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your claim is genuine so you have nothing to worry about with regard the second visit. I know Cunningham Lindsay very well. Some of the biggest insurers in the country sub contract loss adjusting work to them. They turn over huge volumes. They have probably just lost the paperwork! Loss adjusters also sometimes conduct a second visit at the insurers request just to ensure the details provided the second time are comparable to the first and also, bizarrely enough, sometimes even just to provide an opinion to the insurer as to whether you look like you could have afforded the ring in the first place. More often that not though its just because they made a pigs ear of the first report!

 

It sounds like the first loss adjusters comments have unsettled you but as I said early he has no authority to comment at all. If as you say the ring is specifically insured and cover is in order they have to pay the claim. It should just boil down to negotiating a settlement figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi There,

 

Did you ever get this sorted with Cunningham Lindsay? I am going through the same thing with them. They have been a nightmare and always appear to be trying to avoid settling the claim. They really are just that... a company trying to adjust the loss down for the Insurer but they have pulled this Customs Tactic on me even after they have approved the claim. It has been 9 months of struggling with them. I have just contacted the Ombudsman Service but would really like to know what happened in your case? What was the outcome after you could not provide the Customs Receipt?

 

Kind Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there and welcome to CAG. Missy100 hasn't been here since last year, so you may or may not receive a reply.

 

It might be better to start your own thread and tell us a bit more if you can, so the guys can advise you.

 

My best, HB

 

 

Thanks HB, well my story is pretty much the same as this except it's been going on for 9 months and the insurance company approved the claim and offered an insulting amount for half the value of the ring even though their own jewellers could not source and remake the ring with a higher budget.

 

I pushed back and it was going on for sometime until recently they came out with this new customs tactic. It has been stressing me out beyond belief as I put everything I had into my fiance's engagement before she was mugged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just keep going with the complaint. You may have to wait for the FOS to make a ruling, which can take many months. There are lots of jewellery related complaints being made at the moment, as highlighted on a recent consumer programme.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...