Esure Clowns

[moose73]

I have a bmw 523 and I am insured with esure (Fully comp with 13+ years no claims and no points). I had an accident on 2nd Jan where a car pulled out of a side road and straight in to my rear drivers side wheel and wheel arch due to the driver looking the opposite way whilst pulling out. He accepted liability straight away at the scene. I also had 2 independent witnesses.

 

I made the claim with esure about 15mins later after exchanging details with the other driver. I said I was going to take my car to my local BMW dealers for the accident work but was told that they were not approved (BMW not approved to do work on their own cars? ) so if I went with their "approved" repairers then the excess (£250) would be waivered. So reluctantly I agreed. The repairers in question are Banks & Derbyshire of Preston, Lancashire and they picked that car up from my home address. (I did manage to take 4 pictures of the damage before the car went.) I also got a hirecar from a company called Helphire who then would claim this back from the 3rd party.

 

Two weeks later (Friday 19th January) the car was delivered back to my house. (I immediately noticed that my Oakley sunglasses had been stolen out of the locked glove compartment, but more importantly the rear alloy wheel still showed signs of accident damage. So I complained to esure who transfered me to B&D repairers. I arranged to drop off the wheel and have the spare (which was a smaller size) fitted till complete. This was done and on the Tuesday (23rd Jan) I returned to the garage to have the wheel swapped back. It was then whilst driving home that I noticed that when driving round left hand corners that the rear tyre was rubbing against the wheel arch. I then called esure to complain about the quality of repairs made (also the wheel had just been resprayed and not even sanded down so the dent are still visible) I then took it to BMW for a second opinion and was given a quote for £3000 of damage still to be repaired (New suspension, wheel and various metal work which had been bent in the original crash. Esure's engineer just happened to call my mobile whilst I was there and passed him over to the BMW technician who advised that the wheel was back to wards the rear of the car and this could be seen with the naked eye. Esure advised me that I had to return the vehicle to B&D repairers for them to inspect the damage and report back to the esure engineer for a decision. So this I did the same day (Wednesday) I also gave a copy of the BMW quote to B&D for reference. On the Thursday (25th)the car had a further geometry check made and the results differed from the original checks made. All paperwork and photos (including my photos) were sent to the esure engineer for a decision.

 

The decision was made that the damage was caused after the car had been released back to me after the original repairs had been made and that I would have to make a second claim for the damage to be repaired as it was now my fault!

 

I asked him how a wheel could be moved back by 2" to the rear of the car yet not a mark was made to the newly sprayed allow? couldn't answer. I said that the original geo results must have been wrong, but he was having none of it.

 

So today (26th Jan) I have had to make a second claim, so I have to pay £250 excess, and I loose my protection from my no claims, I have also now have to fund a hire car as BMW don't have any cars till the end of next week (as I work as a freelance contract engineer, if I don't go to work, I don't get paid).

 

I can't believe that esure are prepared to pay £3000 for the repairs when it is quite clearly the 3rd party's fault and they have accepted liability (They are covered by Direct Line).

 

I am now writing to esures customers relation manager for a final decision in writing and then to the financial ombudsmen.

 

What else can I do?

[Rob S]

You will have to go through the Esure complaints procedure and exhaust that before the ombudsman will look at it. In the meantime, I would be making strong representations to Esure about the situation.

[moose73]

wrote to them today. Been told will get their final letter tomorrow. Filed on the Ombudsmen complaint forms ready to go.

 

Will be getting RAC to carry out an independent assessment this week before the repairs are made.

[mooreda]

good idea - get RAC to get an independent assessment done - Esure's advert comes to mind "there customer service departments are one of the best"? RIGHT! Don't back down on this and pursue the matter all the way. I think the FOS will find in your favour anyhow and make sure you are paid compensation for their incompetence.

[moose73]

How much compensation should I ask for?

 

so far I have:

 

£250 for excess (which will be payed to BMW)

£128.13 for a hire car 29/1/07 till 2/2/07 (this is due to BMW not having any available.)

Loss of earnings of £250 for 24/1/07 due to car being unroadworthy and getting a courtasey car)

£220 RAC Independent assessment

To change claim from me being liable back to original 3rd party

Reinstatement of 13 years protected no claims

[buzby]

If you are going to pursue a claim like this, make sure you can sunstantiate it in writing. The 'hire car' part is a misnomer, the reason why esure 'approve' their list of centres is because they have forced them to provide vehicles as part of the deal - it is built in to the repair cost, not an extra. Also it is not a like for like, if you Beemer is off the road, you still get a 2-door Clio regardless. Similarly if you are wanting loss of earlings, an accountant will need to provide a statement that your likley loass based on your previous years earnings would be £XX.

 

If you stand there with a shopping lsit of charges, they simply reject your claim and see you in court if you go that route. If your seen as being 'reasonable' there is a chance they may reconsider, and any court action succeed.

 

It is also worth remembering that any dispute you have with them will be reported to the 'Insirance Hunter' database (a bit line your credit file at a CRA, but for insurance companies). They can cause much aggro by terminating your insurance (with notice), and flagging it to IH. Any sunsequent quote you get you'll have to disclose the refusal by them to provide you with cover. One to watch!

[moose73]

at the end of the day they are taking the pi_s and they shouldn't be allowed to get away with it. All the above costs are actual costs, that I will be out of pocket for, due to their incompetence

 

the hire car is for a small focus from easycar, as If I can't get to work than I won't get paid, so I'm saving them money by not claiming for loss of earnings for a week

[juice208]

esure Clowns an understatement. I did not pay 1 instalment no funds but it took these people 19 days to try again by which time the next payment was due. In the meantime I have suspended my cover down grade to 3rd party and theft. I rang on 9.03 to see what athe cacellation package would be, I was told after 20 minutes that a cancellation fee of £25 would be applied but during the time of the downgraded insurance i was entittled to 75% of the full intalment back. so I would get £16 back . net payment due £9. excellent.

today 10.03 a letter demanding £35.83.

today a call to esure total demanded £87.60.

3 different amounts. esure joke. will not believe any esure information in future.

[raydetinu]

Does not your policy from Esure include for a courtesy car while yours is being repaired, which they should then sort out. NU did for me and that was for just replacing the windscreen as they had to get in from germany and took a week; only had to pay £60 excess for windscreen and no loss to NCB. the car was from europecar delivered and not a basic one either, got a brand new Zafira for a week.

[gyzmo]

Banks & Derbyshire. Ooh memories flood back. I can't help think of the number of complaints I received about them when I was at Direct Line, and their service half the time was apathetic - I hated having to deal with hem as well as a couple of other garages. Strangely, post accident damage, missing articles and poor repairs were the main complaints. And they are always adamant that it was not them who caused it, regardless of the evidence otherwise. And trying to get them to issue a courtesy car was harder than getting blood out of a stone.

 

This is the reason why contracts between garages and insurance companies should be outlawed, or at the very least targeting staff on getting repairs into such garages. Excuses given are:

 

1. Repairs carried out quicker. Not true. The insurer's engineer may be on site at their own garage and may give authorisation to start work quickly, but that repairs themselves will take as long as elsewhere.

 

2. guaranteed repairs v. "if chosing your own repairer, it's down to you to sort out any problems". Not necessarily so, according to unofficial advice I received from the FOS. If the insurer instructs a garage to carry out repairs, the insurer can be liable as the prinicple to the garage (agent).

 

3. Waiving excess. They can do this anyway inmost circumstances were liability and costs are not an issue.

 

4. guaranteed courtesy car. Err really? Check the policy. Quite often subject to availability and subject to a maximum number of days.

 

As for Hunter, my understanding is that this should only be used where there is some deliberate and unreasonable action by the insured, such as fraud or continued failure to pay premiums, and should not be used in a vexatious or retaliatory way.