Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Weaknesses in some banks' security measures for online and mobile banking could leave customers more exposed to scammers, new data from Which? reveals.View the full article
    • I understand what you mean. But consider that part of the problem, and the frustration of those trying to help, is the way that questions are asked without context and without straight facts. A lot of effort was wasted discussing as a consumer issue before it was mentioned that the property was BTL. I don't think we have your history with this property. Were you the freehold owner prior to this split? Did you buy the leasehold of one half? From a family member? How was that funded (earlier loan?). How long ago was it split? Have either of the leasehold halves changed hands since? I'm wondering if the split and the leashold/freehold arrangements were set up in a way that was OK when everyone was everyone was connected. But a way that makes the leasehold virtually unsaleable to an unrelated party.
  • 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

LV Home insurance claim not reseolved after 17 months


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 138 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 there,

.

I purchased my house a few years ago at that time I made sure I had home insurance from the get-go.  Before the purchase of the house, I also had a home buyers survey done.  The survey brought up a couple of level 2 and 3 advisories.  The level 3 advisories were for gas and electric maintenance and level 2 were for minor things which required observing. one being that there was a piece of wallpaper coming away from the wall. This was registered as minor with some observing during regular home maintenance.

Roll on 3 years and I've had to put a claim in for a proposed leak, I mention proposed I was not sure as you could not hear anything nor see physical water, however, there were signs of water marks behind the kitchen door, on another partitioning wall, walls had bubbling of plaster, didn't realise at the time but the ceramic floors had cracks but I assumed it was because my kids had dropped and plates and glasses etc. I put the claim in and didn't even think as to whether this was preexisting or not, because all I know is that something isn't right

The insurance accepted the claim to then appoint a contractor to come in to assess the damage and get to plan the scheduled strip-out and reinstatement.  Lots of back and forth at this time because my plumber could not locate the leak. It took 5 months before the insurance appointed a loss adjustor, at this time I was also annoyed with the lapse of time and the multitude of people I had to speak to on a daily basis, so I also hired my own loss assessor to take reigh on the matter. My assessors have been brilliant in moving the claim along, however, 12 months later, we are now on the third loss adjustor who has basically taken things right to the beginning again.  My house had had multiple contractors coming and going, and multiple excavations to my flooring which has since caused other issues as a knock-on effect.

I have raised a formal complaint seeking financial compensation and a resolution from the insurance company.

Now questioning the homebuyers survey, and now LV have instructed the adjustor to have a recorded interview with me next week.  My assessor said he will be with me and this procedure is standard practice.

There's nothing that I have said that I'm happy to repeat, however, we are talking 12 months ago.  Honestly! the last 12 months have been about completing my degree and enrolling on teacher training, ensuring my son attends interventions pre his GCSEs and also taking his GCSEs this year

I was looking for some help or advice, if anyone has ever encountered such an elongated process

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a previous Insurance background and yes hidden water leaks or damage that is gradually occurring is an issue that people/Insurers confront on a regular basis.  Many Home Insurances have 'trace and access' cover, but they cannot keep taking apart a house while they try to find where a leak is.

And it might not even be a water pipe, it might be drainage under the house.  A number of times, I have recommended that the drainage system is subject to camera investigation surveys and these have found that there was damage to drains, that if left to continue causing the damage, could lead to subsidence.  And the drains have then been subject to relevant works, stopping any further damage from occurring.  The camera investigation is where they put a camera through the drainage system on a wire and they record the footage.   The Insurers may not pay for this and usually it is up to the home owner.

The home buyers survey issues you mention are pretty standard.  If the surveyor thought there were any significant issues affecting either Insurance or the value of a house, they would note these.  I don't think I would even mention the home buyers report, as 3 years on, I doubt what was noted has anything to do with what has been happening to your property.

LV have had a reputation in the past of trying to refuse claims at the time of first reporting and then to frustrate the process.   

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

  • 4 months later...

 

Hello there,

I've had to repost again as I couldnt get back into my account.

.

I purchased my house a few years ago at that time, I made sure I had home insurance from the get-go.  Before the purchase of the house, I also had a home buyer survey done.  The survey brought up a couple of level 2 and 3 advisories.  The level 3 advisories were for gas and electric maintenance, and level 2 were for minor things which required observation. one being that there was a piece of wallpaper coming away from the wall. This was registered as minor, with some observing during regular home maintenance.

Roll on 3 years and I've had to put a claim in for a proposed leak, I mention proposed I was not sure as you could not hear anything nor see physical water, However, there were signs of water marks behind the kitchen door, On another partitioning wall, walls had bubbling plaster. I didn't realise at the time but the ceramic floors had cracks but I assumed it was because my kids had dropped plates and glasses, etc. I put the claim in and didn't even think about whether this was preexisting or not, because all I know is that something isn't right

The insurance company accepted the claim and then appointed a contractor to come in to assess the damage and plan the scheduled strip-out and reinstatement.  There was lots of back and forth at this time because my plumber could not locate the leak. It took 5 months before the insurance company appointed a loss adjustor. At this time, I was also annoyed with the lapse of time and the multitude of people I had to speak to on a daily basis, so I also hired my own loss assessor to take the lead on the matter. My assessors have been brilliant in moving the claim along; however, 12 months later, we are now on the third loss adjustor, who has basically taken things right to the beginning again.  My house has had multiple contractors coming and going and multiple excavations to my flooring, which has since caused other issues as a knock-on effect.

I have raised a formal complaint seeking financial compensation and a resolution from the insurance company.

LV's loss adjusters questioned the homebuyers survey, and now LV  instructed the adjustor to have a recorded interview with me, which took place in July 2023.  My assessor said he would be with me and this procedure is standard practise.

There's nothing that I have said that I'm happy to repeat; however, we are talking 12 months ago.  Honestly! the last 12 months have been about completing my degree, enrolling on teacher training, ensuring my son attends interventions before his GCSEs and also taking his GCSEs this year

So 17 months on, LV claims and their complaints department are now just ignoring me; their loss adjustors will not, and they have not communicated with my loss assessors for months. In the recent communication that I recently received, Lv has said that they are still working on liability. If they accepted the claim at the beginning and appointed a contractor, then surely they had accepted the claim at that point? 

 

I have great trouble sleeping, and due to my day job, its really difficult to think of what my next steps should be.

Can I send SARs to LV, Sedgewick, and the contractor before going to the FOS?  

 

The claim was accepted by LV from the onset, and they supplied a contractor with no loss adjustor attached.  At present, with another Christmas passing by, my house is an embarrassment.  Also, all the complaints, lady, keeps pushing me in the direction of the financial ombudsman.  What could be taking so long?

 

Can I SAR the lot of them? LV, Sedgwick's, and the initial contractor they issued to my home at the beginning?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

threads merged

dx

  • Thanks 2

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes send the SAR's

If you have complained before and had no resolution, why not contact the FOS to continue the complaint to see whether this may help gain responses. The alternative is to start legal actions, but this may be expensive and take a long time. So trying FOS first is probably best option.

What is the assessment of what has caused the damage ? This is the most important thing to establish. It sounds like LV are looking at a poorly built house argument and that the damage does not relate to insured perils.

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Thank you for your response.

Lv's excuse is very poor because how long can you wait to review documents from an adjustor who does not communicate with my assessors?

House was built in 1900 (typical house/build), and the issue was found to be a leak under the ceramic floors in my kitchen. Genuine leak, which took time to discover, but eventually they found it. 

My homebuyers report made a very vague note on a bit on peeled wallpaper in another area of the house. It was listed as critical to review immediately; in fact, they said it required prudent monitoring......see attached. I think this is what the new adjustor is leaning on, although LV initially accepted the claim right at the very beginning of reporting. The loss adjustor not assigned until 5 months later 

 

Dampness prdent to monitor (1).pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest you elevate your complaint to the FOS.

LV/Their LA's are in breach of FCA ICOBS claim handling rules. Link below.

 

  • Thanks 1

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...