Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Should I be penalised twice after making one claim with Hastings


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 133 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 all

This is my first question on this forum.

I recently has a burglary which meant I had to claim for damage to my window (Buildings) and  items stolen (contents)

Hastings Direct, who handled my claim atrociously, then sent me a letter saying they won't be quoting me for my renewal. Even though the claim was a no-fault malicious burglary.

When inputting my details into insurance price comparison sites  I was asked what claims I had made in the past three years. It looks like I have to input that I had both a Buildings claim and separate Contents claim which then results in a very expensive quote as the systems think I have made two claims when in reality it was one incident.  In addition I also lose my no-claims bonus for both Buildings and Contents.

Am I wrong in my belief that I'm being unfairly penalised or is this just "The way the system works"

Finally, since the claim I have lost my car keys and whilst I have Key protection insurance with Hastings I wonder if I do yet another claim for replacement will this be a 3rd claim? if so it probably isn't wort it.

Thanks any help much appreciated

PJM

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is a combined buildings and contents policy and you submitted one claim under it for all the loss and damage from the  burglary then it is only one claim. One policy, one insured event = one claim.The fact that for internal claim allocation purposes Hastings split the amount paid between different sections is just for their statistical analysis. It doesn't turn it into multiple claims. So for obtaining alternative quotes it is one claim.  The key point is that all the loses arose from one event, the burglary.

Unfortunately online sites are not very flexible about this. What I'd di get the best 3 quotes produced by the comparison site then call te insurers (if they don't call you first!) a explain the issue and check they understand it was only one claim .

Your bigger problem may be that they have declined to renew your policy. Have they explained why? Having one burglary claim in a year wouldn't normally result in the insurer refusing to renew, just offering renewal at a higher premium. Have you had  previous claims under your buildings and contents policy in the last 5 years?

Does the no claims bonus clause have a definition of what counts as one claim?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ethel

I've only had one claim in my seven years of house insurance so I expect the reason Hastings didn't want to cover me is that, I was so appalled at their claim process and customer service, I contacted their CEO and I expect they just want claimants to bend over rather than call them out at the highest level. 

I'll contact Hastings to confirm it is only one claim. That should be fun.

Regards

Patrick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes only one claim event. When you add details to comparison sites or Insurers sites and note claims, you would enter the date of the claim event. So if it asked to list Buildings and Contents claims separately, because you entered the same date, it would be recognised as one claim.

But as already suggested, you should not just use online quotes, as you need to speak to Insurers, to ensure your quote is accurate for one claim event. And you should also contact local Insurance Brokers to obtain quotes.

Hastings not quoting at renewal time is not refusing or cancelling Insurance. It is simply declining to quote and therefore not something you need to disclose to other Insurers. It could be that Hastings purely for underwriting reasons do not offer Insurance quotes in your postcode area, where there has been a burglary claim. So it may have nothing to do with your complaint. I managed House Insurance underwriting teams years ago and we would get regular criteria lists of risks that we no longer wanted to cover or where we would need to apply terms/conditions to renewal quotes. So it is not unusual for Insurers to not offer renewal quotes.

  • Like 1
  • 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...