Travel Insurance - admin fee for re-issuing cheque

voipphoner

Hi there,

I recently had a travel insurance claim and apparently a cheque was sent out to me.

However I have not received the cheque. I assume it was lost by Royal Mail?

The travel insurance company wants to charge me an administration fee of GBP 10.00 now for re-issuing the cheque. I don't think this is fair.

Is this common practise?

Cheers,
Frank

Quote

Yes.

_________________________________

dacouch

The £10 fee is probably the charge their bank charge them for cancelling the original cheque

FH_Brit

How much is the claim? If you cheque is for more than £10 you'd still be up on the deal rather than arguing over the bank charge and then getting nothing. Your IC have fulfilled their obligation as the lost cheque is beyond their responsibility and to prove who is responsible without evidence is not possible because the cheque may have been lost by the Royal Mail or a post theif stole it, or we've all heard of the lazy Postman not doing his job an "storring" mail and not delivering or getting rid of mail, or even an act of God like a freak wind blew it away.

Pay the £10, get your money and blame the blood sucking banks for charging for every little thing they can and count your blessings you only lost £10!

lisyloo

I would argue with them personally.
They chose to send it by cheque (my recent insurance claim was sent by BACS to my bank accout).
They chose post and didn't send it recorded delivery.
So I would see it as their problem.
There are better ways to pay these days and they chose these risks, not you.

Personally I'd probably pay the £10 and then write a letter of complaint.
If they spend even 1 hour on it, it will cost them much more than £10.
They will soon realise this and you may well get a "gesture of goodwill" of £10 because it will cost them a lot more to argue with you.

If they don't want to take these risks then they should use BACS or other methods or use more secure postal methods, but it was their choice not yours.

FH_Brit

lisyloo wrote: »

I would argue with them personally.
They chose to send it by cheque (my recent insurance claim was sent by BACS to my bank accout).

And you'd loose too Lisy - Cheques are a reasonable and perfectly legal way to send funds, and in your "leagally bindin policy" it's probably covered that you agree to that way and you probably agreed that any additional fees like these would be covered by you. Again people do not read what the sign then complain that they were not told later - well you were and signed to accept.

They chose post and didn't send it recorded delivery.
So I would see it as their problem.

Again cheques are a reasonable and perfectly legal way to send funds - It is not guaranteed delivery (neither is recorded delivery by the way) but the legal term "every reasonable care being taken" and the IC did comply.

There are better ways to pay these days and they chose these risks, not you.

The IC may not have BACS service (it can be very expensive to set up) and the cheque probably comes from an assistance company not your actual insurer. These companies make their money from a commission the insurers pay them so cost cutting is big for them, that's why it's covered in your FULL POLICY WORDING.

Personally I'd probably pay the £10 and then write a letter of complaint.
If they spend even 1 hour on it, it will cost them much more than £10.
They will soon realise this and you may well get a "gesture of goodwill" of £10 because it will cost them a lot more to argue with you. Waste of time, really worth it for £10? Yes there is a matter of principle but, you know, principles have cost a lot of people a lot of money in the past.

If they don't want to take these risks then they should use BACS or other methods or use more secure postal methods, but it was their choice not yours. Wrong as I said YOU agreed in your policy so it was not their choise it was by mutual agrreement - AGAIN people not reading what they sign!

only my opinion, but I work with these companies.

lisyloo

And you'd loose too Lisy

It's a possibility.
Mostly in the past I've won (about 6 times - last time was £3K on a pension).
But at the end of the day it would be the loss of a piece of A4 paper, a stamp and an envelope.

Sometimes you have to do it on principle rather than have it nag away at you.
In this case it's only £10 but sometimes it's better to try and then lose, knowing you did everything you could, rather than wonder about it.
I wondered about my endowment for many years and wondered whether I was doing the right thing by my husband. I did the complaint, expecting to lose but to get closure on knowing I'd done everything I could.
As it happened we got £1500 (as a "goodwill gesture" of course).

Again people do not read what the sign then complain that they were not told later - well you were and signed to accept.

Totally agree. I was not arguing there was a legal right here to compensation.
I was saying that it might work if the person is sufficiently motivated to pursue it.
As I say it's worked for me many times in the past.
Imagine spending 4 hours, getting well paid people to answer queries e.g. head of customer services. What do you think that costs?

Waste of time, really worth it for £10? Yes there is a matter of principle but, you know, principles have cost a lot of people a lot of money in the past.

Depends how wound up about it your are really.
Not my call this time.
I can't see this costing anyone more than paper, envelopes and a stamp.

Wrong as I said YOU agreed in your policy so it was not their choise it was by mutual agrreement - AGAIN people not reading what they sign!

I don't remember ever seeing details of methods of payments in my insurance policy to be honest and I can assure you I do read what I sign. (If you really want to argue about it then I can send you my docs and you can point it out to me).
The customer is fully entitled to make a complaint by this route and disagree with you.
I have done so many times and have been almost always succesful.

I fully accept that sometimes I have been successful because not because I was right but because the company did not want to spend hundreds of pounds arguing with me (for example £350 or thereabouts if you lodge a complaint with the ombudsman).

I agree with you on the legal and contractual matter.
I was not arguing on that basis.

FlameCloud

I deal with over ten insurers on a day to day basis and have never heard of an admin fee to cancel a cheque and reissue it.

dacouch

Banks do generally charge for cancelling / stopping a cheque, my charges customers if they lose a cheque or its eaten by the dog etc etc. He does not want the risk (However small) of the original cheque being paid as well (It could be presented by the person who he sent it to or if someone has stolen it from the post they could somehow cash it.

Here are the Lloyds TSB charges and theirs shows a £10 charge for cancelling a cheque http://www.lloydstsbbusiness.com/ratesandcharges/accounts/chargesforotherservices.asp

dauphin

The insurer has accepted an obligation to pay money to the OP in settlement of his claim.
A cheque is nothing more than a written instruction from the drawer to his bank to pay money to the payee.
Cheques are generally accepted because they are mutually convenient to the drawer and to the payee, but unless there is an agreement to this effect, the payee is under no obligation to accept payment from a third party (the drawer's bank).
In this case, the insurer claims to have written an instruction to its bank to make a payment to the OP and to have sent it to the OP for presentation to the bank, but the OP has not received the instruction.
In the circumstances, it is quite clear that the debt owed by the insurance company to the OP remains unsatisfied and it would be open to the OP to bring legal proceedings for its payment. Therefore, on the face of it, the OP should not agree to pay the £10 fee for replacing the cheque.

Even if the policy says that claims may be settled by cheque, I see no reason why this should be assumed to be at the risk of the insured unless that is also stated to be the case, which I think is most unlikely. Suppose the cheque has already been intercepted and stolen by a third party - surely nobody is suggesting that the OP is not still entitled to be paid?

lisyloo

Banks do generally charge for cancelling / stopping a cheque, my charges customers if they lose a cheque or its eaten by the dog etc etc. He does not want the risk (However small) of the original cheque being paid as well

Yes, agreed.
However the insurer chose to send it by insecure post, so morally I'd say that's their problem. There are choices of postal method.

If let's say I owed money to a company, do you think they'd accept my bank charges if a cheque was lost in the post.
Not for a minute.

If the company choses to use cheques and insecure post then they have to accept the odd charge. They are in fact "self -insuring".