new for old insurance

Insco

cot1198 wrote: »

still not had settlement from L&G nearly two weeks settlement was agreed. When I phoned them to see what was happening I was told the claim had still not been passed to the correct department for processing. I can not understand why these things take so long, the only explanation I got was there had been a bank holiday

Deplorable service cot

cot1198

I agree, both my wife and I are very upset at the way we have been treated by L&G. They just draw out every single stage of the claim process. They never contact me I always have to ring them to chase things up.
The incident happened on the 3rd July, thats nine weeks ago on Thursday, I do not think that is acceptable service, not by a long way.

Assess_Saw

Interesting to see that Axa are able to release figures which according to them reveal a rise of 80% in fraudulent insurance claims

woodys_wonders

Goodness me, just been reading this thread, poor OP asks for help and the whole thread turns into a slanging match.
Get a grip.

FlameCloud

Assess_Saw wrote: »

why won't insurers release this information surely they have nothing to fear by doing so?

Probably the same reason assessors dont release numbers on the claims they've had rejected by the FOS.

jeppy

I haven't read thru the whole thread!

Only read the 1st 2 or 3 and a couple of recent threads!! So sos if out of touch!!

A long time ago I was in Household Ins. Generally the policies would include new for old but on a like for like if you wanted some thing different and better it was classed as betterment!!

Basically you are entitled to upgrade but at your own cost!!

They should pay for the cost to put you into the same position as before!

jeppy

Having Read a little more but not all!! As an insurer some circumstances give rise for concern!

Generally people don't put anything on their TVs!! So if you say I/my kids put a glass on the TV and then it was accidentally knocked over! They think that this maybe a little unusual and therefore have to look into the circumstances!

This doesnt mean they think you are making a fraudulent claim!! However in circumstances like these they will have to make sure the claim is legit!!

Remember who you are don't take it personally!! They dont know you!! So they have to check everyone in the same way!!

It is true that people make fraudulant claims! The cost of these are passed onto innocent insureds who never or rarely claim so people will get upsrt!

You are insured for this risk!! Stand your ground!!

cot1198

All through the claim I have said I am willing to fully cooperate with the insurance company and assist them in any way and as quickly as I could, and I can fully understand their need to investigate claims where they feel the need. What I do have issue with though is the length of time it has taken to agree a settlement and then the length of time it is taking to get the settlement cheque to me. We where without the TV for seven weeks. I was told two weeks ago the settlement cheque would be with in two to three days so we went out and got a new TV of our choice(I have no problem with them giving me the settlement amount and me putting money to it so I can get the TV I want) and still no cheque.

Sponge

cot1198 wrote: »

At last, had to ring them myself twice to get the matter resolved, engineers report says unrepairable so they offered me a £180 crt from tesco or ASDA.
I said is it the same make and model or even the same spec as my old TV, they said no it will probably be a beko or thompson one. I said that was not really new for old but they said because my old TV was a crt model these were the nearest models they could supply, but they could give me a cash settlement so I could put the extra money to it and get the TV I wanted. This is the option I went for. I now have a new TV in place. I'm still not pleased with the time it's taken to get the claim sorted, but the wifes' happy and and the kids are happy! what more can you ask for? I'm just glad it's done with

Did they go as far as saying you can't have an equivalent TFT because they're better than CRTs? Because that's a pretty big assumption! (And in that price bracket, often completely untrue.)

cot1198

no not really, they said that as my damaged TV was CRT and as there were CRT TVs still available at the same screen size then that is what is what they would replace it with, even though they would not be the same make or model. If I wanted to go for a cash settlement then I would only be given the market value of on of these CRTs approx £200 less my £50 excess