Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
    • Northmonk forget what I said about your Notice to Hirer being the best I have seen . Though it  still may be  it is not good enough to comply with PoFA. Before looking at the NTH, we can look at the original Notice to Keeper. That is not compliant. First the period of parking as sated on their PCN is not actually the period of parking but a misstatement  since it is only the arrival and departure times of your vehicle. The parking period  is exactly that -ie the time youwere actually parked in a parking spot.  If you have to drive around to find a place to park the act of driving means that you couldn't have been parked at the same time. Likewise when you left the parking place and drove to the exit that could not be describes as parking either. So the first fail is  failing to specify the parking period. Section9 [2][a] In S9[2][f] the Act states  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN fails to mention the words in parentheses despite Section 9 [2]starting by saying "The notice must—..." As the Notice to Keeper fails to comply with the Act,  it follows that the Notice to Hirer cannot be pursued as they couldn't get the NTH compliant. Even if the the NTH was adjudged  as not  being affected by the non compliance of the NTK, the Notice to Hirer is itself not compliant with the Act. Once again the PCN fails to get the parking period correct. That alone is enough to have the claim dismissed as the PCN fails to comply with PoFA. Second S14 [5] states " (5)The notice to Hirer must— (a)inform the hirer that by virtue of this paragraph any unpaid parking charges (being parking charges specified in the notice to keeper) may be recovered from the hirer; ON their NTH , NPE claim "The driver of the above vehicle is liable ........" when the driver is not liable at all, only the hirer is liable. The driver and the hirer may be different people, but with a NTH, only the hirer is liable so to demand the driver pay the charge  fails to comply with PoFA and so the NPE claim must fail. I seem to remember that you have confirmed you received a copy of the original PCN sent to  the Hire company plus copies of the contract you have with the Hire company and the agreement that you are responsible for breaches of the Law etc. If not then you can add those fails too.
  • 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

Horrific experience with Davies Group/Modus Underwriting. Any advice?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2453 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 bought my current Home Contents Insurance a few months ago from Intelligent Insurance and paid annually, upfront.

 

Last month I lost my laptop and iPad after leaving one of my bags behind in a store. I returned to the store and periodically checked to see whether the items had been handed in. I also called the police to report the loss. The following morning I contacted my insurance company to make a claim. I was asked to explain what had happened and to email over receipts proving ownership of the lost items as well as photos of the boxes the items had come in. I did all this straight away.

 

Then I heard nothing at all for 8 days. Finally I was told a Loss Adjustor from Davies Group would be ringing me to "interview" me. The phone interview with the Loss Adjustor lasted for around one hour. The Loss Adjustor requested an increasingly over the top array of documents. He accepted he'd already received ample evidence proving I owned the two lost items. He now asked for receipts and bank statements to document which grocery shops I'd visited to buy groceries in PRIOR to losing my items. Bus and train tickets proving I was in the area. Further receipts proving I was in the shop where I lost my laptop. And various other documents. I sent everything he had requested and answered all of his increasingly bizarre questions.

 

A further three or so days later, the Loss Adjustor emailed me to say he'd sent his report over to the underwriters and they'd sort out settlement of the claim.

 

That was over a week ago. I've now been told, today, all of the following by Davies Group:

 

"We've not received instructions back yet from your underwriter"

"Actually we have received instruction from your underwriter but we can't tell you what it says."

"We may need to pursue further lines of enquiry."

"We may require further communication."

"It could take up to 40 or 50 days to give you an answer."

"We can't tell you yet whether we will accept your claim."

"We've no idea when we will have an update."

"The person dealing with your claim is in a meeting."

"The person dealing with your claim isn't in the office this week."

 

WHAT ON EARTH?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Make a formal complaint to your Insurers head of claims in writing. Send it recorded delivery.

 

If you have supplied information to verify the loss situation that happened, they should just sort out replacement of the items. This is provided they find no evidence of non disclosure e.g previous claims history not advised to them.

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 already made a formal complain in writing to the insurer and have complained over the phone as well. The people I bought the insurance from, Intelligent Insurance, seem concerned and claim they are investigating Davies conduct. The underwriter, Modus Underwriting, could not care less though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I already made a formal complain in writing to the insurer and have complained over the phone as well. The people I bought the insurance from, Intelligent Insurance, seem concerned and claim they are investigating Davies conduct. The underwriter, Modus Underwriting, could not care less though.

 

Intelligent insurance are fobbing you off, they will have little clout.

 

If you've already complained to the underwriters and got nothing, it's time to go to Lloyd's (of London, not the bank) - google their procedure and contact them. They may pass it back to the underwriters to look into if there is still a bit of their process left, but the underwriter will deal with it knowing Lloyd's are breathing down their neck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Modus are probably just providing underwriting capacity and don't deal with any admin on the policy as such.

 

Intelligent Insurance should sort this out for you.

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've just noticed a number of other complaints about Davies Group in this forum. How do they get away with it?!

 

They deal with huge numbers of claims and they are really only bothered about meeting their contract with the Insurers. Policyholders don't like being investigated for making claims, feeling they are being accused of something. Also you get arguments about work needed.

 

Always complain to your Insurers, as they are the ones paying Davies.

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

Intelligent Insurance are appalled with the way it's being handled, or so they say. They've said that given it's a relatively low value straightforward claim they've no idea why it's taking this amount of time and that they don't understand why I was asked for proof of travel and proof of grocery shopping at the initial interview.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Intelligent Insurance are appalled with the way it's being handled, or so they say. They've said that given it's a relatively low value straightforward claim they've no idea why it's taking this amount of time and that they don't understand why I was asked for proof of travel and proof of grocery shopping at the initial interview.

 

I think you will find that Davies group know a lot more about the claims process they have agreed with the policy underwriters than Intelligent Insurance.

 

If you tried to distance yourself from the claim you are making. If you worked for a claim assessment company and someone was claiming for a lost laptop and ipad, left behind in a shop by accident, i think you would be asking pertinent questions. The reason for asking the questions is why someone would be so absent minded to leave such items in a shop. Most people with items of such value would be very aware of carrying such items and would be very alert to keeping them safe.

 

It might help for you to come across as understanding why a claims assessor is being suspicious about a claim and to be as helpful as you can. So far you appear to have done this and you come across as having suffered a genuine loss. The claims process is designed to test those with claims that are not genuine in some way.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...