I don't really see who you can go after? Admiral have recorded the details of an incident you were involved in. This will not affect your premium during the current insurance contract so you have no argument against them. The terms and conditions that you agreed to will have said that they will record information - there is nothing in the law to say that their terms and conditions have to be 'in the public interest'. They have to meet certain fairness requirements but this wouldn't come anywhere close - it's no different to a bank recording your payment history. If you go to a new insurer, they can ask whatever questions they want - within the law - if they ask if you've had any incidents or claims, you have to answer yes to this, because you have - it's then up to them if they increase your premium as a result. That said, you are free to pursue via the FOS (which costs nothing), but I can say with certainty that they will not request Admiral to remove the details of the incident from their records. Edit: it may not seem fair, but sometimes life isn't. The 'law' which would apply to an insurance company contract in terms of fairness is the UTCCR 1999

Generally FOS 'token compensation' will be around £50-100 (if they award any - beyond that you essentially need to have suffered financial detriment) - I also understand what you are saying but essentially, you've had 8 years of cover at a much reduced price, so their error has benefited you. As unclebulgaria says, it's difficult because you haven't had to claim so the instinct is to think they wouldn't have been paid out, but they would have treated it exactly the same as they have now, and would have had to deal with the claim.

When you go to your new insurer see if you can get them to agree to apply the NCD retrospectively once it's restored by your current insurer (you'll need to call them for this).

In terms of the matching items, they should pay for 100% of any damaged items and 50% of any undamaged items (as per financial ombudsman guidance) - they can't claim to not be aware of this guidance, but generally won't offer it unless you complain. In terms of alternative accommodation, it does sound habitable from what you've said - habitable means capable of being lived in, and if you have cooking facilities, bathing facilities, and water/power then it is habitable. I'm concerned about the mention of no bed though (a mattress on the floor can't be good for you) - that would make it uninhabitable - have they not offered any payment in respect of the contents yet? edited to add: I differ from quite a few people on CAG - with insurance, there is no need to make a formal complaint in writing. Speak to CIS now and tell them you want them to log a formal complaint so you can take it to the ombudsman, this will start the ball rolling as they have 8 weeks to respond, after which you can take it to the ombudsman. You also have the bonus that the person on the phone may realise that they've made a mistake and sort it out, whereas a letter may take some time to get read and dealt with.

Don't worry, but on the flip side expect them to query the claim much more - it may be a good idea to have your previous policy details handy when you ring them, and acknowledge that you've just changed insurer, but you have had continuous insurance...

Have they issued a final decision? (it sounds like they have). If so, go to the Financial Ombudsman now as it can take time for them to deal with the complaint. I'd also carry out a data subject access request as per Uncle Bulgaria's post above. How much is the claim for? What is the sum insured for personal possessions?

They should have been clear on anything which they have been deducted. Quite often, their contractors will charge a management fee (which is the charge to manage the claim - admin staff, etc) which can legitimately be deducted from the settlement. They may also have initially deducted VAT but then decided to pay it. You are perfectly right in saying you are entitled to know what work they are doing in your house - however you are not entitled to know how much they will charge for that work - the reason is fairly straightforward. If (as an example) their contract with Churchill says they charge £20.50 for protecting a room, they don't want that getting back to XYZ insurance, who they charge £35 to.

There are generally no minimum standards for claims - they should be dealt with in a timely fashion - but the weather this winter has been severe which has stretched most insurers significantly. Complaints should be acknowledged within 5 working days, and a response should be provided within 40 working days. In terms of a breakdown of costs, it is commercially sensitive (as there will be an agreed schedule of rates with the contractors, forming part of a confidential commercial contract - in most cases they are not permitted to release this information to third parties) - what most insurers will (and should) provide is the scope of repairs which will show exactly what work they are carrying out. If they say they are replacing with an equivalent quality flooring, then this is what they will do. If the insurer carries out the work, then you have the protection of the ombudsman if anything goes wrong It may be worth making a complaint (have they responded to your previous complaint?) and I would anticipate them offering £50-100 in compensation for the inconvenience of the delays.

Out of interest, when you spoke to them when you received the cheque, did you say "I've got a cheque for £2,940 and I'm only expecting a cheque for £2,500" or did you say "I've got a cheque here, can I cash it"? I'm just wondering how clear you were that you thought they'd made a mistake? In terms of full and final settlement - it is full and final, but you have a bill for physio which is part of what the settlement covers, so that's not a great argument (unless the TP insurer had been the ones to instruct the physio - however they weren't). As has been pointed out above, it's quite possibly the physio who will be the one's to not get paid - and at that point they will probably pursue you - up to you if you want to ignore them - although it hardly seems fair when you've benefited from their service.

Have you complained to express insurance and been given a final decision? If not, you will need to complain to them first and they have 8 weeks to respond, if you have, you must make a complain to the ombudsman within 6 months of receiving it.

I only have the current policy booklet to go on but wording is similar. Section A - damage to your car - won't cover it as this refers to the definitions of "your" and "car" which effectively mean the vehicle you own shown on the schedule of insurance Section B - fire and theft - not applicable Section C - liability to other people and their property - apart from the fact this clearly says "other people", it will not cover payments to " anyone we insure under this section, if the claim relates to loss or damage to property that belongs to them (either as owner or as joint owner) or is in their care." - it is also covering your legal liability, which does not exist here Section D - windscreen and window damage to your car Section E - personal accident - doesn't cover property damage to relevant Section F - additional benefits - nothing for damage to property, other than personal belongings whilst in your car Section G - foreign use - not relevant Section H - no claims discount - not relevant Section I - personal accident plus - not relevant Section J - courtesy car option - not relevant Section K - legal assistance - not relevant Section L - breakdown option - not relevant Imagine for a second you're a claims handler at AXA - for something to be covered on the policy, it has to come under one of the sections which are listed in the policy booklet. How would you cover it? Under which section? Whenever your car appears, it is defined and refers solely to the car in your schedule. I'm not sure why you're talking about legal costs incurred without their consent - this means that you get your own solicitor involved without speaking to AXA first, they will not pay the solicitors fees. There is no "without our consent" qualification to the section on property you own. I don't think AXA have been particularly helpful in explaining things to you, but they will have covered the damage to the vehicle you were driving under section A. There is no valid claim under section C for the damage to your other vehicle. The bullet points in section C under we will not pay are all independent of each other.

You are insured for your legal liability in respect of third party claims - that is to say they will cover any costs which are awarded in a court. Generally speaking, it will not get this far as the insurers will settle before it reaches court. The key element is that you cannot possibly be legally liable for the damage to the second car - as owner of the second car, to get damages awarded, you would have to sue yourself - which you cannot do. The only cover is therefore under the comprehensive cover section, and this will only cover the car named on the schedule.

You are correct - however the 23rd was one of the worst storm's we've had this year and was pretty much nationwide. If the OP is an an area which suffered high winds that day (most) then they will find it very difficult to prove negligence. If the winds are 'storm force' then they will almost certainly defend as without any evidence the roof was in a poor condition (7 years isn't that long to go without a roof inspection on a pitched roof), on balance of probabilities, the tile will be deemed to have blown off in the storm. However the court fees will only be £70-£80 (depending how much you're claiming) and it'll be a small claims hearing so the other side can't claim costs back so it may be worth proceeding. The letter before action won't cost you anything.

Do you have how they've phrased it in writing? Does your policy number start with HDA (home options) or HIA (solutions)? If HDA, then their policy documents have the following provisions: This is how they settle claims and finally, this is the definition of sum insured So if you are underinsured, it wouldn't reduce any payments or limits, it would just mean they can apply wear and tear to your settlement (which you obviously can't do with alternative accommodation!) I'm guessing they've made a payment to you for damaged contents items, realised your underinsured and are now trying to backtrack because they should have made a deduction from your contents claim for wear and tear. Technically, they can do this (make a deduction from a different payment due to their mistake) but if it puts you at a financial disadvantage, it is not treating you fairly. Your best bet would be to speak to the insurers (I recommend speaking, others will say to write) and lodge a formal complaint - they will then investigate and issue you with a final response, after which you can take your complaint to the financial ombudsman. Try to emphasise that if you hadn't been told the £8,000 limit then you wouldn't have spent it - if you have this in writing it would be even better. Good luck!

Which don't apply to financial services...

To request a police report, they need a very specific form (an 'Appendix D') to be filled out, signed by you and sent to them. They cannot apply for it with just the CAD number. Police reports are not usually requested by standard, and only where something doesn't add up, or they are looking for a particular discrepancy (usually), so they wouldn't have requested it automatically at the start of the claim. They have 8 weeks to respond to a complaint (defined by the FCA as an 'expression of dis-satisfaction') so I would suggest emailing them again, marking it formal complaint and noting you have not received an acknowledgement letter or final response to your complaint of [whatever the date was]. Ask them to provide you with a final decision relating to the issues you have raised (the unreasonable delay in them making a decision) as you wish to involve the financial ombudsman as you do not think the company are being fair. I would suggest giving them 2 weeks to do this (they have 8 weeks to respond to a complaint. and in this case, your quickest hope is that someone is on the ball and deals with it to avoid having to pay the FOS a fee to deal with the complaint).

They are entitled to investigate a claim to ensure they are satisfied it is valid however it doesn't appear that they are doing this in an efficient manner, so there certainly is some cause for complaint. A police report will take anywhere from 2 weeks to 3 months to come back, so I'd get an official complaint made now in the hope they will decide not to bother. Sign any forms they send you and send them back so you can't be accused of having held things up.

Get two quotes from local builders, and at the same time as this, ask the insurance company for the schedule that they have prepared for the repairs. You can then compare the schedule with your builders quotes - if they have not included something (which is necessary), or included an inferior quality product, then ask them to increase their offer. If you're still not happy, you can make a formal complaint - however this will take a long time. If it just comes down to a case of the insurers preferred building company being cheaper, then it's unlikely to be successful, but if you can demonstrate that they have not made an offer of settlement on the basis of replacing everything like for like, then you have a good chance of the complaint being upheld.

Distance Selling Regulations don't apply to financial products so there is no right to cancel without penalty. You generally have a right to cancel - the so called 'cooling off period' - however the company also have a right to charge an administration fee. With low cost insurance (travel, temporary), that fee is likely to be more than the cover costs - so you would not actually receive a refund. You can make an official complaint - the company will sometimes back down (if you go to the FOS then they generally get charged a fee of £550 regardless of if they win) - the company has 8 weeks to respond, after which time you can take it to the ombudsman. If you carry out a chargeback as per the above advice, they're likely to just sell the debt onto a debt collection agency.

To give you any possibly useful advice (other than what's posted above), you need to answer these questions - unless you just want an opportunity to rant. At the address you're living at, do you have anything registered there? bank statements? driving license? car tax? are you on the electoral roll? If not, is there an alternate address where these things are registered at? have you ever done car insurance quotes at that address? were they cheaper?

It's an odd situation. By far the easiest option is to just prove your address to them. They have cancelled for mis-representation and if they can prove fraud, they are entitled to keep the premium. The 7 days thing is a bit of a red herring - they did give you 7 days in the letter they posted, and by law, once a letter is posted it's seen as if it's been received. That just leaves you with the issue of a single email with the wrong wording. However, unless you can now prove your address, that doesn't actually change anything. At the address you're living at, do you have anything registered there? bank statements? driving license? car tax? are you on the electoral roll? If not, is there an alternate address where these things are registered at? have you ever done car insurance quotes at that address? were they cheaper? Your options are now 1) Prove you address - by far the easiest option 2) Go to court - sue for breach of contract in the small claims court. They may back down based on this alone, but it seems like they have a fair bit of evidence against you 3) Go to the financial ombudsman (FOS) - before you can do this, you need to make a formal complaint which gives the company 8 weeks to investigate and respond to the complaint. If you are unhappy with this, you can take the complaint to the financial ombudsman. Unlike the courts, the FOS will decide if the insurance company has been fair in their dealings with you, rather than just looking at the law. It's free to use the FOS, and if you're unhappy with their decision, you can still use the courts (but if you go to the courts ffirst, you can't later go through the FOS). It is important you get this sorted - for the rest of your life, you are going to have to tick that box that says you've had a policy cancelled (on all types of insurance) and you'll find the cost of insurance rockets.

As UB has said, unfortunately, this means the cancellation will need to be disclosed indefinitely - your wifes policy was not cancelled because you had a conviction, it was cancelled because your wife did not disclose the conviction and thus misrepresented the risk.

There's something important to check here... Why was the policy cancelled? was it cancelled by them because you informed them mid-term of your conviction, or was it cancelled because you didn't tell them about the conviction when taking out the policy? If it's the former, then I'd argue that it shouldn't affect the premium charged, as they can't discriminate against you because of a spent conviction. I would expect you'd still need to disclose it though unfortunately. If it's the latter, then the cancellation is not for your conviction, it's for mis-representation and as such will need to be disclosed in full and will likely affect the premium.

Have you spoke to which about the issue of them using the recommended provider logo when they don't have that status? I think you'll struggle on a misrepresentation claim - although they may have induced you into making the contract based on being which recommended, if you'd have gone with anyone else, they have the same sorts of conditions e.g the condition which I presume they have applied to your claim is... [no cover for]... "valuables carried in any suitcases, trunks or similar containers when left unattended." First Direct (who are a which recommended provider) have a condition [no cover for]... "loss or theft of personal belongings or valuables which you have left unattended" Both have a similar definition for unattended which covers any situation where you cannot see the items, or you are unable to take any action to prevent loss. So it's difficult to see how they've actually caused you harm - I suspect if I have a look through the other recommended which policies they will have similar exclusions.

How was the first policy taken out, and did you disclose the 4 claims when it was taken out (this has been asked several times but I'm not clear from your last post on the answer)? If you did, you can argue that they knew about them and I suspect the FOS would uphold a complaint on that basis If you didn't, I don't think you'll get anywhere - very few insurers would quote with 4 previous claims. Make sure that for any replacement insurance you are declaring you have had a policy cancelled.