Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Dave2019   That response to your councillor is short and direct so lets see how your councillor will act with Platform.   I think you have noticed that Platform are not telling the correct facts to news article/MP/Councillor which is absolutely typical of these Housing Association to always give there version of events to make them look as if they have done everything by the book to make them look good we haven't done anything wrong.   This is when you challenge them as you have done and throw there own Customer Community Engagement Strategy in there face and you keep doing this with what I have pointed out in post#67 (as a reference).   The more you do this the more Platform are not going to like it as it impacts their own Customer Care Policy, Complaints Policy and that specific Customer Engagement Strategy as these look more like just a paper exercise to make them look good but putting them into practice they are not just failing but are in fact Breaching those Policies.            
    • Ok! I think it's about there, I've added those final points. Thanks again for looking this over!   Px CLAIMANT
 ERUDIO STUDENT LOANS LIMITED – AND – DEFENDANT XXXX WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXX I, xxxx of xxxx, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;   1. The Witness – xxxx states in point 3 that:   “It is noted that the Defendant does not dispute entering into a credit agreement with the Claimant.”   This in not true. I have never entered nor admitted to entering into an agreement with the claimant.   2. The default notice mentioned in point 6 was issued on 26/04/2017 and served 4 years, 3 months and 27 days after the last written acknowledgment of the debt on 30/12/2012 by myself. Thus, the cause of action delayed by 4 years 3 months and 27 days and the Limitations period prolonged to 10 years, 11 months, 16 days. This, in effect, allows the creditor to stop time running and the creditor having effective control of when a limitation period begins or even starts to run.   3. In point 5 xxxx states I was issued with A Notice of Assignment on 22/11/2013. In point 6 he states that a Default Notice was sent to me on 04/03/2014. In point 7 he states I was sent a Termination Notice on 26/04/2017. In point 8 the legal proceedings and transference to Drydens solicitors took place without my knowledge.   I received none of these notices or assignment. It has now come to light that they were all sent to an address I had not resided at since 2001. The Student Loan Company was aware of my current address at the time that the alleged documents were sent.   I have always kept the Student Loan Company informed of my current address.   4. In point 18 the Claimant claims the Termination Notice issued on the 26/04/2017 was the cause of action, this is patently untrue - the termination notice does not determine the Statute of Limitations date.   Pursuing a debt after a 6 years is clear breach of OFT guidelines and CPUT.   5. Addressing points 21,22 and 23 - the claimant contends its unfair to allow a set aside 16 months after a default judgement, yet failed to issue a default notice within the 6 year limitation period therefore breaching the rules of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 87/88.   6. I the defendant, contend that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and
is STATUTE BARRED pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. 
If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.   7. The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £2489.03 or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied. 
   8. The defendant’s costs in dealing with the claimants default judgement and their set aside application to be paid by the claimant within 28 days.   (a separate costs sheet is attached).   Statement of Truth   I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   Signed: xxxx Dated: 17/05/2022   Costs Sheet Cost of N244 application form: £255.00      
    • Hi   I hope you are keeping as well as came be expected during this. and even if you want to rant here about this If A2 are still ignoring your letters/emails then that the Housing Ombudsman is now looking into this matter and have requested your evidence so far of their failure in Customer Cara and more importantly their own Complaints Procedure by failure to acknowledge letters/emails.   As you have already spoke to the Ombudsman I would contact them again and just explain to date A2 are still completely ignoring you with your complaint and you take this as a Breach of their own Complaints Procedure.   You look after yourself and even if you just want to have a rant about this to get this out your system you know where we are.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Help with meaning of wording - Travel Insurance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4877 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

Loss, theft or damage to valuables left unattended at any time (including in a vehicle or in the custody of carriers) unless deposited in a hotel safe, safety deposit box or left in your locked accommodation.

 

Unattended - means when you are not in full view of and not in a position to prevent unauthorised interference with your property.

 

I had valuables stolen from my car that were out of sight and locked in the boot, the car had an alarm and was parked near a security office so I took as much precaution as I could. I had no accommodation at the time so this was the safest place. Am I still screwed or can I argue that based on me not having accommodation at the time this was the best situation to prevent unauthorised interference with my property?

 

To me it seems unreasonable to deny if it was out of sight and in a locked compartment, especially as it was alarmed and near a security office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you reported the claim yet? Hopefully it will be accepted - for example I know that Norwich Union/Aviva would accept such a claim so long as the boot was locked and the vehicle was completely locked, so that the valuables are out of view.

 

Where did you buy your policy from? The wording you quoted does sound a bit vague - it says valuables left unattended "including in a vehicle" are excluded but it doesn't say whether it is OK if the vehicle is locked and the valuables are hidden. So it is difficult for me to judge whether the claim would be accepted or not. It sounds like you did your best in the circumstances so I hope it will be accepted, but if not it would be a good idea to check whether your home insurance covers you for belongings temporarily removed from the home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a look at Endsleigh's website and there is no policy wording available, presumably this is because they are a broker and they don't underwrite their own policies.

 

As this is a policy for people studying abroad, maybe the terms and conditions are different than for standard travel insurance. I'm not really familiar with student policies, but hopefully it will work out OK for you. Let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Endsleigh are NOT a broker, but a regulated insurance company.

 

You can get a copy of their current policy booklet, but you have to input 'phantom' information to get a quote first - it can then be downloaded as a pdf document.

 

The OP mentioned valuables (What are they?) If electrical then, regretably the claim has been correctly repudiated. If other goods, then subject to the severe terms detailed.

 

The policy wording (Section 22, page 38) reads:

 

What is not covered

1. The first £50 of each and every claim per incident claimed for under

this section by each Insured Person.

2. Loss, theft of or damage to specified electrical items left

Unattended at any time (including in a vehicle or in the custody of

carriers) unless deposited in a hotel safe, safety deposit box or left in

Your locked accommodation.

3. Loss, theft of or damage to Baggage contained in an Unattended

vehicle:

a) overnight between 9 p.m. and 9 a.m. (local time) or

b) at any time between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. (local time) unless it is in

the locked boot which is separate from the passenger

compartment for those vehicles with a boot, or for those vehicles

without a separate boot locked in the vehicle and covered from

view.

 

The definition of Unattended (Page 4) is given as:

Unattended – means when You are not in full view of and not in a position to prevent unauthorised interference with Your property or vehicle.

Whilst I understand the the OP had no accommodation at the time, I regret that does not override the standard policy exclusions.

I trust that this clarifies

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Endsleigh are NOT a broker, but a regulated insurance company.

 

Are you sure about that? On the "about us" section of their website it says they are one of the UK's leading independent intermediaries. I'm aware that they're now 100% owned by Zurich insurance company, but they still seem to search a panel of insurers, at least for home and motor insurance. Or do they underwrite their own travel insurance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

LemonTwist,

 

I stand corrected; intermediary as you state, albeit owned by Zurich. My apologies!

 

I checked the Travel policy again;

 

Your Insurer

AXA Insurance UK plc. Registered in England No. 78950. Registered

Office: 5 Old Broad Street, London, EC2N 1AD.

AXA Insurance UK plc is authorised and regulated by the Financial

Services Authority. This can be checked on the FSA’s register by

visiting the FSA’s website at http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register or by contacting

them on 0845 606 1234.

Notwithstanding, I stand by my comments regarding policy cover.

 

H

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly your claim would most likely be declined. You may need to refer the matter to your home insurers.

Despite the fact you locked your car and had them out of sight the insurers view is that you should keep all valuables on you at all times.

The FOS would uphold the insurers decline im afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would challenge it. I cannot see how such an exclusion would apply whereh there is no accomodation to speak of. What are you supposed to do when checking out? Fly it all by secure, army supported courier?

 

I cannot see such an exlcusion applying exclusively, and the definition of unattended has been challenged in court successfully.

 

I could of course be wrong as travel insurance was not my area, but I can say that you have nothing to lose by challenging it on the basis that the exlcusion only applies where you have accomodation to speak of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I deal with travel claims but their wording is quite strange to what ours is.

You could ask for FRL (Final Response Letter) so you can refer to FOS.

I wrote one today on a complaint i was assigned for the same thing and they are taking it to FOS.

If they are on dodgy ground with their wording or have lost prev cases they wont uphold the decline.

Every time a customer goes to FOS it costs the insurer regardless of whether they win or lose so from the insurance point of view we dont like to uphold declines on cases which we may not win. It is not worth it. Sometimes if it is something new and out of the blue we will let one get to FOS as a test case.

I know that this seems quite negative but i would rather be honest with you as this has been my job for 6 years and i would daily with the FOS.

Good Luck x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time a customer goes to FOS it costs the insurer regardless of whether they win or lose so from the insurance point of view we dont like to uphold declines on cases which we may not win. It is not worth it.

 

Just a little asides, I am wondering whether insurers are still deciding whether to uphold complaints or not based on the cost of it going to the FOS. That certainly used to be the deciding factor in deciding whether to compensate - rarely was it the merit of the complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is still a major factor Gyzmo your right.

In the current climate the insurance companies are tighening their belts and if we may not win the case we often pay out even if technically it shouldnt be covered. There is no point us spending time defending the complaint for it to go to FOS as then we pay a case fee plus if we lose we have to pay interest on top of the settlement figure so in some cases we end up paying double than had we backed down and paid the claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you pay a claim or compensation to avoid a case going to the FOS, is it considered an ex-gratia (out of grace) payment?

 

According to the policy wording which Helford posted, it seems that claims for unattended property are accepted, just as long as the goods are kept in the boot out of sight, and it happened between 9am and 9pm.

So surely it depends on when the break-in happened? Or have I misunderstood the wording?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you pay a claim or compensation to avoid a case going to the FOS, is it considered an ex-gratia (out of grace) payment?

 

According to the policy wording which Helford posted, it seems that claims for unattended property are accepted, just as long as the goods are kept in the boot out of sight, and it happened between 9am and 9pm.

So surely it depends on when the break-in happened? Or have I misunderstood the wording?

 

 

Lemon Twist your correct the time does matter and they will use the police report to determine it - or they should depends if they have the brains to check the documents.

 

Its only ex gratia if they pay out something that is specially covered. If its a grey area then it would be paid normally and not as ex gratia. Normally ex gratia is where someone has guarnteed cover and costs have resulted from that so the customer has incurred costs from incorrect advice.

 

Always follow the complaints procedure - the amount of declines i over turn is staggering. The claims handlers dont always have the understanding of the wording and kick claims out without full facts and evidence. Plus the complaints team have more flexibility - they should be viewed as help not ememies as often we fight to get the claims paid :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...