Just over two months ago my wife and I got back from holiday to discover our kitchen was flooded as the result of a burst pipe situated behind the plasterboard located in the area of the sink unit. I notified the insurer, Esure, who promptly sent out a company called Building Validation Solutions (BVS) to assess my claim. The guy from BVS acknowledged the claim and agreed we were entitled to a settlement. During the site visit I was told that he would draw up a scope of works and then authorise a cheque by way of settlement, and that he'd phone through the amount of the payment that evening. The damage was quite extensive and required the installation of dehumidifiers, replacement chipboard flooring throughout the kitchen & utility, replacement base level kitchen units (for our bespoke kitchen) and new vinyl flooring that had been fitted less than one year ago. Also included in the scope of works were replacement architraves and skirting boards, and a contribution towards the cost of redecoration. The guy from BVS said that they leave the customer to find their own contractors, preferring to put the insured in a position to get the work done quickly by making a speedy settlement. I got a phone call from the BVS assessor at approximately 7.30 pm that same evening with an offer of £1700, minus the policy excess for water damage of £350, a net amount of £1350! The vinyl flooring we'd installed less than a year prior to the claim cost £500 alone. The BVS claims assessor further said that he'd instruct a cheque to be issued the very next day. I then remonstrated that the settlement figure seemed awfully low, but was assured that the figures were properly costed and a breakdown of the scope of works he'd drawn up would be available on BVS’s website for my inspection. Having spent a sleepless night wondering how on earth I’d get the work done on the payment I’d been offered, I phoned the BVS chap the following morning and told him to hold fire on a settlement; I was going to conduct my own research. To cut a very long story short, I decided to appoint a Chartered Loss Adjuster to work on my behalf and paid for a RICS survey, the cost of which would be reimbursed IF BVS’s scope of works was found wanting. Following several meetings between my loss adjuster and then another claims company appointed by the insurer, I had a telephone call today informing that Esure had agreed to settle the claim at a figure in excess of £10,000. My learning points from this experience: Do not take it for granted that the insurer will appoint an impartial loss assessor Do not accept a first offer of cash settlement Appoint your own Chartered Loss Adjustor if you think your claim will likely run into thousands of pounds

Hi All I've been a silent reader of this excellent forum for some time now, but as of now I need a little help/friendly advice. I had an old stlye SLC loan (pre-97) which I'd deferred for many, many years, moving address along the way. Hadn't heard anything for years, then some Erudio letters arrived via an old address, which I ignored (not always the best course of action), and recently I've also received letters from Capquest who I gather are one and the same. Alongside this, I've had calls/texts and have been harassed extensively. Occasionally, I've tried to engage in conversation, but I can't actually get through the data protection checks they ask for at the beginning of the site. Usually, I'd just follow previous advice and ignore - as a lot of people here have done on here. However, and this is where it gets weird. I was forwarded a letter dated last week from Capquest which I subsequently binned, and haven't actually spoken verbally to anyone about this. This morning, my work phone rang, and a guy claiming to be from TM Legal was trying to get hold of me. How they got my work phone I have no idea and was quite taken aback. He asked to put me through security, and I refused as I was at work. (open plan office etc.). Googling them reveals they are a legal firm based down South who deal with CCJs. I checked my credit file, and did a search on the Trustorg site, and nothing is showing up. I'm a bit confused, and have no other outstanding debt whatsoever. What would you do? Would anybody advise sending Capquest/Erudio Statute barred letters? Or just ignoring extensively. I'm pretty sure I've not spoken to them in six years, but I honestly can't recall the last time I sent deferral stuff. Could've been around 2012, but I'm really not sure of this. In addition, I've categorically NEVER spoken to Erudio direct. Any advice would be very much appreciated. Kind regards M

New students are being alerted to a [problem] where fraudsters claim to offer a "educational grant" in a bid to con them into divulging bank details. The emails typically claim to be from the university's finance department and trick the recipient into clicking on a link to an online form and entering their personal and banking details. The Student Loans Company said students were particularly vulnerable to "phishing" attempts around the main payment dates, in September, January and April. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37408373

Don't say you weren't warned. This is actually a bit spooky! http://simply-wrong.com/dont-say-we-werent-warned/

From the BBC yesterday:

One of the site team has received an email from their Neighbourhood Watch scheme regarding the following:- https://www.gov.uk/government/news/motorists-warned-about-driving-licence-reminders-received-by-text-or-email So please do be aware of this.

Have you seen the Adverts? Have you read the small print? There just a front for Loans 2 Go, they only recommend loans for 2 companies Loans 2 Go and Log Book Loans both companies are owned by the same company. Seems anyone can set themselves up as a broker, there website(S) yes there are several all point to these 2 companies I am sure they could be done for false advertising saying they will find the best loan for you when they only recommend these 2 companies. Dont be fooled, stay clear

Women are being urged to check their car insurance ahead of a new rule coming into force next month which will ban firms from taking gender into account. It means female drivers will see their premiums go up by as much as 25% after 21 December. Some insurers say it might even be cheaper to cancel a policy and sign a new deal before the changes come in. More ... It was obvious they would up the womens policy and not lower the mens. This is twice now the government has forced extra profit on insurance companies and forced us to pay more. First was the con of the 'continuous insurance' and now the 'no gender concessions'. Are MPs shareholders in insurance companies, it would seem that way.

Have a look at this! http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/09/payday-loans-shaft-the-poor?INTCMP=SRCH