CIS + FOS = I lose!

tulse_luper

Had claim for stolen vehicle "LOST" by CIS last Dec and every promise they made (times stated to reply, settle claim etc, calls/letters re sorting out the matter) were broken.

I decided I had been messed around too much so informed them I would not deal with them or their 3rd parties as the contract had been breached due to their tardiness and unreliability after paying them for over 4 years.

They said the claim was therefore cancelled.

I was prepared to follow their complaints procedure (uselessly non responsive: another promise broken) and they chose the FOS as final avenue for settlement.

SEVEN months later FOS states I should get £50 comp and STILL have to wait for their 3rd parties to judge the claim (no doubt any amount easily reduced by said 'comp' figure!) CIS have retained my insurance premium (expires Sept 06) for the whole 7 months when there is not even a vehicle to be insured.

Whole business has grossly inconvenienced me, affected health etc and now seems like I am being forced to accept this tiny sum as "full and final settlement of complaint".

Probably too late for any legal case (7 months) and will take more time and more costs (I haven't either).

Would YOU take the £50 or face further hassle trying to get a more just solution? FOS rep stated their decision will be looked as "final" by judges.

Are the FOS truly independant?

Or am I 'living and learning'?

T

Astaroth

Yes, the FOS are independant and are probably as they should be, slightly slanted towards the customer.

I obviously dont know the details of your case as you havent said what the issues were other than broken promises and even then it really would be necessary to see the claims file to get both sides of the picture (which is what the FOS are there to do)

You have up to 6 years to issue court proceedings - if you are talking small track (a claim under £5k) then it is more or less a £60 fee for issuing which can be reclaimed from the otherside if they lose. Be aware that whilst solicitors fees cannot be claimed it is possible for both sides to add other costs like expert witnesses which the losing side would have to pay if the judge deems their evidence was necessary.

£50 simply for inconvenience does not seem a bad settlement figure and you will still be free to contest the valuation if you dont think that is fair as and when you receive it.

tulse_luper

Ta for reading and responding A; am in the dark re these matters so appreciate any knowledge/expereinces of others (had a look round the site but couldn't find anything quite similar; hence the arrogance of starting my own thread).

If the FOS are slanted in the customer's favour, then can only presume that a large rich company like CIS (with their vast resources, procedures, systems) behaving sloppily and causing distress, (to make a victim of crime feel further victimised) have been 'fairly' judged. And a fair penalty (£50 plus 7 months premiums with no possibility of any claims being made in that time; so No Risk to CIS) will prevent them being sloppy to other customers. It will; surely?

I suffered depression and inability to work, due to the feelings of the injustice of it all (the Double Whammy) AND having my mode of transport lost, but maybe I am over-sensitve; in the FOS's opinion. I haven't seen their 'breakdown' to find how they arrived at their decision. All that was made clear was that I had no rights to halt dealing with CIS even after they failed all their pledges. 'They' can renege and withdraw promised support but I am expected to tow the line at all times. But that must be fair or the FOS would challenge it (?)

Am reluctant to go through all this again when (if) I finally get a claim figure granted even if I appreciate your advice re timescales for court etc. But please excuse my cynicism re the £50 being swallowed up in any subsequent figure/future premiums/loss of No Claim etc. And CIS have held onto the possible claim amount for a further 7 months (at least) than the timeline stated in their policy literature. That strikes me as another victory for CIS and their cash-flow.

I have never had such treatment from other insurers; (4 years unblemished riding with CIS and then when you need help; they 'lose' you and forget you exist) so would not recommend the same company: on my experience.

Oh well; c'est la vie!

Astaroth

Ultimately yes, the £50 will be reflected in future premiums, not just for you but everyone. Insurers work out their price based on how much they have coming in and how much they have going out which does include fines/ awards from the FSA & FOS.

As I say, I do not know enough about the case to give my opinion on the matter. £50 is a fair amount to receive purely for "inconvenience" - generally courts give up to £15 for this head of claim.

Unfortunately if you read the terms of conditions of almost all insurance policies there is a fair number of standard clauses like the fact that loss of use is not covered, you have to co-operate with them fully etc. Whilst many of these appear in the policy books many are also set by law too. The FOS certainly doesnt have the power to go against these rules/ laws but they can deem an insurer to be over zelous in its application of them.

Also, simply because the FOS tends to be slanted one way or another that isnt to say every case is ruled on perfectly... back in my claims days I used to occasionally deal with FOS complaints and there were some that I thought we were on 1000% safe grounds and were ruled against and there were others that I thought we had "chanced it" in what we had done but the FOS ruled in our favour.... that being said and done 98% of them you could correctly predict the outcome. I had the advantage of being independant - ie neither the person being complained about nor the customer - that I could see both sides of the arguement and not have the emotion of the situation which is very difficult to do when it is you it is affecting