Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • That isn’t actually what the Theft Act 1968 S1 actually says, BTW. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/1 (1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;   The difference between what you’ve said and the Act? a) intent to permanently deprive rather than  just depriving (which is why the offence of “taking without consent” was brought in for motor vehicles, as otherwise "joyriders" could say "but I intended to give it back at the end") b) dishonesty : If I honestly believed A's pen belonged to B, and took it and gave it to B - B might be found guilty of theft but I shouldn't be. 
    • Received a call and follow on confirmation email from the police about my cabinets! They wanted to confirm that I was prepared to support police action for the matter and that I would be happy to provide a statement and attend court at a later date!!! I think that something might actually get done - it won't get my cabinets back I know that but hopefully it will put a stop to this so called courier doing this to people!
    • Around a month ago I had to send a sympathy card to a friend in GB. Logistically it made sense to buy a personalised one on eBay and get it sent straight to my mate, rather than faffing around getting it sent to me.  This mighty purchase set me back all of £3.05 (including postage costs). I was taken aback that, when it was sent, I got a tracking number.  For a flippin' three-quid card!  I had no idea that technology had moved on so much and that tracking was so easy.  The shop has feedback for 16,300 purchases so tracking must be easy & automatic. It's unlikely your case will get to court, but in cases that do this got me thinking that we need to aggressively challenge the PPCs where they have lied about the timescales of sending their rubbish and have no proof at all of posting - when it would be so easy to provide it.
  • 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

travel insurance rip off help needed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6283 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

i booked a holiday on 10 july 06 for 6 people to travel to egypt in may 07 in oct 06 one of the people traverling my father in law died when in hospital for hip resurface the cause given was for ismatic heart dease. we went and placed a claim with thomsom who sold the insurance and contacted axa insurance. my mother inlaw also did not want to travel due to the loss of her husband. well we claimed for two cansulation fees, after having to pay out for death cert to send to them and also another 40 pounds for two years medical records they turned down the claim.

 

reason given failing to disclose medical disorder, he only had high colestriol , well mothers claim for not wanting to travel due to the loss of husband same reason given, so they wont pay.

 

the travel agent thomson gave us no information on the insurance or on anything we was just told it will cover all,

 

when i took this up with axa they said it was down to thomsom for misselling the insurance and as they was not regulated it was not thair problem.

 

i have been throo all complaints and one plays it of against the other and im 380 pounds out of pocket for insurance and with other bits cans fees and medical bits and phone calls its now up to about £980 out of pocket

 

i have been on to watchdog and the insurance obs man but has any one else been throo this or have any idears what i can do many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi,

cant offer much help sorry,

i wont even go in a thomson travel agent after they ripped me off.

we booked to go to the states, got free travel insurance, cut a long story short hubby had fight with sister, ended up in court so had a criminal record. no entry allowed for him.

we to cancel the holiday allready paying the full deposit. the cheeky B******s then would not let me cancel until i had paid the insurance money £440 (not that we even claimed on the dam thing)

 

my heart goes out to anyone that has the misfortune to deal with this company.

 

good luck and i hope you get your money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate reading stories like this because it reinforces the bad impression that the public have of the insurance industry, and justifiably.

 

1. Most travel policies will ask you to declare pre-existing medical conditions and /or whether you have seen a doctor in last 12 months etc. If you honestly believed to the best of your knowledge and belief that there was nothing to declare then you have a case. Was medication prescribed for the high cholesterol? The fact that the hospital treatment was for one thing but death was a result of something else helps your cause I think.

 

2. Pursue with Ombudsman, I am sure that they will not appreciate the misselling element and will hopefully find in your favour.

 

3. Do you have legal expenses cover under household insurance? If so, launch legal action against Insurer for breach of contract - that will please them ;-)

 

4. Never buy travel cover from travel agents as they are not regulated (After all they sell holidays!! and have no (insurance) knowledge at all). The FSA are looking into this area as it is.

 

Wez1211

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to get some definitive medical evidence that the death was wholly unconnected to any pre-existing medical condition.

After all, if you declared on your application for insurance that you had visited the Doctor in the past 12 month's because you had sprained your ankle, and then later you suffered a heart attack, then one can hardly be related to the other. So that is something to think about.

 

However, really your claim is against Thomas Cook for mis-selling. Did they not give you any details of the policy before you signed and paid for it - didn't ask about pre-exiting medical conditions etc? Didn't even give you anything to read about the policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no thomas cook did not ask any questions about medical and to dat5e i have been given no medical insurance books or policys at all

they are more following that he had high blood pressure and colestrol but at the time of booking we said that dad had to go into hospital for hip surgery

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find that the Ombudsman cant help you as the insurance that travel agents sell is not regulated by the FSA. You will have to take your complaint to ATOL or what ever travel organisation they are a member of.

 

But the insurance company is. The complaint is about declining cover, and will therefore come squarely under the Insurance Ombudsman remit.

 

Let's not get into the alleged mis-selling straight off, here.

 

First port of call is the Ombudsman, about the insco refusing to cover on failure to disclose a medical condition which is unrelated to the cause of death. Now in this case, it may well be that there is no case to answer as ischaemic heart disease can be a direct consequence of build-up of cholesterol, and there is a possibility that the PMH was indeed very relevant.

 

If that is the case, then, and only then, should OP go after Thomson for mis-selling the policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Roncarron SAYS - "when i took this up with axa they said it was down to thomsom for misselling the insurance and as they was not regulated it was not thair problem".

 

It was on watch Dog or some consumer programme about how the holiday companies are selling unregulated travel insurance, think Thompson might have been one of the first to say they where going to start selling regulated insurance (this was only last month) lets hope it applies. It should say in your policy document.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...