Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Try CPR 31.15 Possibly but a party is not compelled to disclose any documents pre allocation
    • Hi, I shown my key worker a letter that was sent to me saying that I owe £1200, she setup a standing order around 2021, this was to pay back money I owed, with my mental health status I have had complex issues to deal with and I just simply forgot about this standing order so it has been running for about 3.5 years acording to my key worker, anyway I'm not worried about the money that was sent that I call a overpayment, it went towards supporting my child's household so I am just happy with that, I am a little sad that I am being told I still owe this £1200, I have sent bank statements over 3 years worth but they have not taken away this £1200 bill and still say I owe it   Thank you
    • She did try contacting EON in the early days of the debt but they refused to speak to her because she could not pass the security checks. She didn't know the answers on an account she hadn't opened?   I also saw this article recently which could be what has happended here: Debt collection agencies in the UK are using fair means or foul to link people to an address where an unpaid debt has been run up, sometimes years after they have moved out The Guardian Anna Tims Mon 22 Apr 2024 The letter from the debt collection agency arrived out of the blue, and it was intimidating. It informed Joshua Simpson* that he owed £2,212 to Octopus Energy, and accused him of ignoring previous requests to settle the bill. If he did not stump up within 14 days, he was told, further action would be taken to recover the money. Simpson checked his Octopus account – it was in credit. Then he noticed the address where the debt had been accrued between 2022 and 2023. It was his childhood home – which his family had sold 18 years previously. "Since I was only 16 when we left the property, I was astonished that they'd linked my name [to it]," he says. "The debt collection agency insisted I provide a tenancy agreement to prove how long I've lived at my current address. I couldn't, since we bought our home. "They are now actively pursuing me for this debt, causing me a huge amount of stress. We are about to remortgage, and if this debt prevents us switching to a better deal, we will face real financial hardship." Simpson had been sucked into the shadowy world of "identity tracing", whereby investigators recruited by creditors seek to locate individuals who have moved home without paying their bills. It is an unregulated sector where anyone can set up as an agent in a back room without a licence, or scrutiny, and use fair means or foul to identify debtors. Reputable companies join a trade association that operates a code of practice, but membership is not mandatory, and mistakes are common. Last year, a teenage boy was chased for a debt of more than £900 by debt collectors acting for the energy company Ovo. A "trace agent" had somehow linked him to the debt because his parents had previously rented the property in question. An investigation by the Observer established that the debt had been run up by a subsequent tenant. The consequences of mistaken identity can be catastrophic. Individuals who are erroneously linked to a debt face, at worst, court action, bailiffs and a ruined credit rating. At best, they can endure weeks of stress and paperwork in order to prove they are not the debtor. It is estimated that 20m identity traces are made in the UK every year, many on behalf of companies that are owed money. Personal data is often obtained from credit reference agencies, which record applications for credit, and details are supposed to be verified with several different sources before being used for debt enforcement. In practice, however, this does not always happen. Simpson's details had been passed along a chain of intermediaries before the demand was issued. Octopus had given the unpaid account to a debt collection agent, which had contracted a tracing service, GBG, to find the debtor................ Full Article: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/04/a-cry-for-help-energy-providers-play-the-villain-in-dramas-to-chill-the-blood ..............The Financial Ombudsman Service, which investigates complaints about financial firms, states that debt collection agents have to produce convincing evidence to link an individual to a debt, rather than rely on names, addresses and birth dates. According to the trade association, the Institute of Professional Investigators, an unknown number of investigators and trace agents are operating below the radar. Many more are merely inept, as data protection compliance training is not mandatory. "We have been campaigning for many, many years to try to get all private investigators regulated," says secretary general Glyn Evans.
  • 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

im worried insurance wont pay out


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5468 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 had two claims one in 2001 and 2002. I took insurance out in 2006 and but did not disclose the claims as the first one I couldnt remember if the insurance paid out it was about 400.00 a bike theft from gardan and the 2nd one was on one of my rental properties so I didnt think they needed to know for residentail properties. I took out the insurance in 2006 and still with the same company I was burgled a month ago my claim totalled about 8K. I was told to inform them of the previous claims because if they found out they would void it. Now the underwriters are looking into it.Does it mean they will ust void my insurance as they wouldnt want to pay out for the burglary

Link to post
Share on other sites

As they are older that 6 years ago im sure i can say you will be ok

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the insurance out in 2005 not 2006 and I am still with the same insurance company. They are saying I did not disclose it in 2005 at the time of my application.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I know you aren't gonna want to hear this but I think they would be within their rights to void the policy and not pay any further claims - It will also mean that you will pay higher on any future premiums with other companies (as your current insurers will not allow you to continue with them) as you will now be classed as having insurance cancelled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

assuming thats why I said I think.

 

But I assume it to be more likely than not - or if they believe you were not deliberately obstructing them they will possibly make you a reduced offer on your claim - this does not happen very often in non-disclosure claims.

 

How long have they had your claim?

 

Have they told you they are investigating it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I told them I didnt know my rental property was disclosed to residential, The other one was long ago I dint think they paid out but I informed them.

The lady said they may void it it needs to be looked at by the under writers. The thing is if I had disclosed at the time I would have still been insured so hopefully they may just make me pay difference of premiums and reduce me claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

what you say is correct they would have still insured you but at a higher premium and they COULD say you deliberately tried to mislead them in order to not pay this - not true - but thats what they could say.

 

If they have told you they could possible void it I would say that something is coming whether that a reduced offer or cancellation of insurance and no claim payout I'm not sure but it'll be one or the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will need to look at what was asked in the application. Usually insurers put a time limit, such as claims in past 5 years.

 

The second point is whether your current claim and past claims are material. If, for example, your current claim is for subsidence (I'm only using examples here!) then a theft claim will have nothing to do with it.

 

The question asked must be a clear questions (not causing confusion) and your answer must lead the insurer to accept the policy when they otherwise would not have done.

 

I would wait to see what they say and take it from there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason it is being rasied is because I took the insurance out in 2005 at the time it was not disclosed. They were storm damage and theft of a bycycle outside the house the first one was 2001 I didnt remember the insurance paying out hence why I did not mention as I had a memory loss for a lot of things around that time.The other storm damage. As I am still with the same insurers in 2009 I bought these to there attention. I could have left it but I remembered and said I best mention to them. The thing is had I changed insurers I would not have had to mention to them as it was past the 5 years. I have been told that if they would have insured me at the time they will just make me pay the difference of the premium. But Im not building my hopes up as I can imagine them not wanting to pay out for my claim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there is the issue of making a claim with insurers, and then the same insurer asking a question for information that they ought to have known the answer to anyway. In such a case I think all they can do is ask for additional premiums - but even then I think they will have a cheek.

"Well we would have charged you more had we known about those claims"

"Err, you did know - you were the insurer"

"Oh. Ummm, yes, well, err...."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I called them up and told them. I dont think they would have known otherwise due to the time of the claim but was advised to do so. Im just waiting to see what they say now anyway. I have been told if they would have insured me with these claims they have to just reduce my claim by the additional premium. But who knows what they may want to do. I also think they way they should look at it although I should have told thme in 2005 had I changed insurers in 2008/2009 wouldnt have had to mention it. Oh and they were not the insurers the claims were with

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a technicality, but they should not reduce the claim. They should ask for the additional premium and pay the full claim out. The only time they should reduce payment of a claim is if you are underinsured or there is more than only policy covering the same risk.

 

Like I said, wait to see what they say and then come back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its odd I thought automatically they were going to void my claim although I am waiting for them to get back how ever even the financial omudsbusman said wait and see because they want to know on what grounds they would void it. They said I should just wait and see because I am proberly worrying over nothing. However becuase of the amount of the claim wouldnt they want to create some problem. Like voiding it and hope I accept it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your a star mate. Gosh I just cant wait 3 weeks for them to contact me though. A mate of mine said they wouldnt even have bothered telling them as it was some time ago. I suppose I thought it was a good idea at the time and would have been worse if they found out. I thought I was with prudential whne one happened when I called them they didnt even have a record of me?????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...