Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see the poops are still trying to deflect from their own criminality and and abuses by whinging on about raynors buying her council house - now about election registration - anyone who owns a flat or house understands that you dont give up your and your childrens home just because of a new relationship and while we are on about that ..   lets start with When is jenrick being revisited for both lockdown abuses and self admitted (claims estate is his main home - not the property in his electorate or his london property) 'possible (lol) electoral registration abuses as he claimed he was at his estate 'main home' away from both London and his electoral 'home'  - much of which paid for by the taxpayer     Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick 'breaks lockdown rules twice' by going to 'second home' - Mirror Online WWW.MIRROR.CO.UK Key Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick drove 150 miles to his 'second home' after urging the nation to remain in their homes in a bid to...   ... perhaps follow with more self admitted lobbying while in a potion where they shouldn't “A few of us in parliament have lobbied the government – and with the help of the Treasury select committee, the chancellor has listened,” John Baron wrote.   Tory MP faces lobbying questions over Treasury committee role | Investing | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Co-owner of investment management firm called for ‘urgent’ post-Brexit changes to City rules at committee meetings     About time labour got in the game and started pressing for these self admitted/bragged Tory abuses were properly investigates.
    • No I didn't I got the dates mixed up.   
    • Sorry about that, TJ. The person who posted it specifically said it was free access. Here's another version of the FT article. https://archive.is/KYrPa
    • Isnt there some indication in there of at least intent to inform arbuthnot? IF he wasn't then it would seem to be Vennells decision to keep him 'uninformed .. Although seems to me if arbuthnot was unaware - he was either incompetent or should have very detailed records of denials. Seems vennells is constantly at the core of all the lying about all these issues though.
    • Paywalled/subscribe HB I'm unaware of the details on this HB but why is it a potential taxpayer burden? Hasn't a judge already ruled port has rights of access - so shouldn't costs be on the private company (South Tees Development Corporation) trying to change established access?     LIVE: High Court updates as CEO gives evidence in access rights row between STDC and PD Ports - Teesside Live WWW.GAZETTELIVE.CO.UK The face-off between the Teesport operator and Mayor Ben Houchen's South Tees Development Corporation continues in the High Court  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 160 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2235 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

Hello Friends,

 

I had bought a TV insurance from BigWarranties for protection from accidents ( cracked screen ). Unfortunately when I went to make claim, they said that their T&C excludes screen cracking from projectiles.

 

Just wanted to find out if it is common to have this kind of exclusion in TV insurance plans which cover accidents.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks SgtBush, I tried looking at T&C of TV care plan of Currys, John Lewis, AO and Argos. None of them have this exclusion.

 

Can you tell me a few such TV care plans which have such exclusions. Also what is Wii

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on excess on your Home Contents, see if that covers the damage.

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

I had this TV insurance only, Nothing else.

 

I am trying to find if other TV care plans have such exclusions. I want to mention in my complaint that the sales agent should have mentioned this exclusion as it is so uncommon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought car insurance as a tenant.

I deliberately drove my car into a lake when I realised I was in fact a landlord.

 

My insurers are refusing to replace my 1996 banger with a brand new Aston Martin Vantage, quoting their terms & conditions.

Is it common that not reading the T’s & C’s and then being surprised when their claims are denied for a common (and reasonable!) exclusion .....

 

You will have had at least 14 days from purchase to get and read the policy documents, to ensure it was suitable for you, and to cancel penalty-free if it wasn’t.. The exclusion is reasonable (and, as another contributor has mentioned) was bought in after lots of cases of screen damage from projectiles where adequate care wasn’t being taken (in the case mentioned, the Nintendo Wii, where controllers are waved around vigorously and can end up being hurled at the screen if the advice to use the restraining straps isn’t followed).

Edited by Andyorch
Edited
Link to post
Share on other sites

Their website has a link to their Ts & Cs, projectiles are mentioned under what isn't covered, point no 9.

 

https://bigwarranties.co.uk/product-tv

 

HB

 

Direct link to the T's and C's: https://bigwarranties.co.uk/documents/Appliance_Terms.pdf

 

The example of Wii controllers has been cited earlier in the thread. These are more explicitly covered under point 17, wheres point 9 could cover them (generically) but fits more with balls and toy gun projectiles (Nerf darts and so on)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Direct link to the T's and C's: https://bigwarranties.co.uk/documents/Appliance_Terms.pdf

 

The example of Wii controllers has been cited earlier in the thread. These are more explicitly covered under point 17, wheres point 9 could cover them (generically) but fits more with balls and toy gun projectiles (Nerf darts and so on)

 

You're right the policy does define if it was a Wii controller or similar, what it's not strong at is stating a projectile has to be thrown, so if you kicked your shoe by mistake, that is neither a projectile nor thrown.

 

I'm assuming it wasn't a Wii by the Op's response.

 

Having the wording online isn't bringing the unusual exclusion to the policyholders attention.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having the wording online isn't bringing the unusual exclusion to the policyholders attention.

 

True. However, we don’t know if there was (as is common practice from the last few insurances I’ve taken out!) a comment made at point of sale along the lines of “you will get a copy of the policy documents. You need to read these carefully to ensure the cover is what you need. If not, you can cancel this policy with no charge within 14 days....” (& then a warning you can’t cancel the policy if you make a claim first, and so on).

 

If the exclusion is reasonable and the policy holder is pointed to it (and the policy documents), it can stand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought car insurance as a tenant.

 

I deliberately drove my car into a lake when I realised I was in fact a landlord.

 

 

 

My insurers are refusing to replace my 1996 banger with a brand new Aston Martin Vantage, quoting their terms & conditions.

 

Is it common that not reading the T’s & C’s and then being surprised when their claims are denied for a common (and reasonable!) exclusion .....

 

 

 

You will have had at least 14 days from purchase to get and read the policy documents, to ensure it was suitable for you, and to cancel penalty-free if it wasn’t.. The exclusion is reasonable (and, as another contributor has mentioned) was bought in after lots of cases of screen damage from projectiles where adequate care wasn’t being taken (in the case mentioned, the Nintendo Wii, where controllers are waved around vigorously and can end up being hurled at the screen if the advice to use the restraining straps isn’t followed).

So bazza, did you get your Aston Martin in the end?

How many miles to the gallon do you do in town?

Thinking of doing the same thing

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So bazza, did you get your Aston Martin in the end?

How many miles to the gallon do you do in town?

Thinking of doing the same thing ������

 

No, sadly, they didn't give me the Vantage. I'm holding out for a Buggati, though.

 

As for the mpg ; if you can afford to buy/maintain / insure that sort of car, are you bothered by the mpg?.

Edited by Andyorch
edited
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...