Esure charging £200 after I make a claim

Quentin

lisyloo wrote: »

It's a personal opinion, but I would still advise people to pay 75p rather than risk the letter getting lost......

But it's incorrect advice!

The cheapest way you can send a recorded delivery item is to use second class post (32p) and then pay the recorded delivery fee on top which is only 74p extra (no matter whether you use first or second class).

lisyloo

The cheapest way you can send a recorded delivery item is to use second class post (32p) and then pay the recorded delivery fee on top which is only 74p extra (no matter whether you use first or second class).

OK, correction accepted.
Yes, it's 74p rather than 75p for the recorded part (and you need to pay postage on top).

That wasn't the point of my post though.
The point was that Proof of delivery and in some cases proof of posting can save you loads of hassle for a small cost.
In this case I'd want the letter received in which case Proof of delivery is important.
In some cases (goods on approval) proof of posting is sufficient.

Quentin

lisyloo wrote: »

That wasn't the point of my post though.
The point was that Proof of delivery and in some cases proof of posting can save you loads of hassle for a small cost.
In this case I'd want the letter received in which case Proof of delivery is important.
In some cases (goods on approval) proof of posting is sufficient.

Yes, good points well made!

The "professional" adviser above telling us not to bother with recorded delivery is way out, and clearly impervious to all the benefits of paying that extra 74p. (Which is not limited to just proving delivery!)

Weave

magpiecottage wrote: »

I have to say, though, that I would normally use my insurer's approved repairer.

If a car is new enough then I would always use my own preferred garage and main dealer if possible. The repairer I used was BMW approved (connected to the dealership) so the cars bodywork is still covered by the standard BMW warranties. The repairer used BMW paint and BMW parts and not a cheap alternatives. Esure did not dispute the first quote sent to them so was all relatively hassle free and is fully guaranteed.

I would expect the insurers own recommend repairers have to work on very low rates in order to secure “recommended repairer” status which could impact on the quality of the work (my opinion only!).

magpiecottage

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't agree that this is the best way to do things (personal opinion of course).
Legally it's correct that it's "deemed" to have been received.
However this case would have taken many months longer if a letter had been lost and the case had gone to the FOS rather than been sorted by esure.

It's a personal opinion, but I would still advise people to pay 75p rather than risk the letter getting lost and having to wait 6 months for a case worker to be assigned at the ombudsman.
The letter can still get lost if you send it recorded of course, but at least you can check the tracking information and find out and re-send a copy. This could save 6-12 months (I have personal experience of about 6 ombudsman cases).

Even if Royal Mail bother to record delivery (they didn't with the last two items I sent) if it then gets lost by the insurer (which I suspect is more likely) then you are in the same boat.

Of course if you do not have proof of delivery then the eight weeks won't start running at all.

You can also complain by fax (good because it has its own proof of delivery), e-mail or telephone - the FSA Register will have the contact details.

And you can always send a reminder, with a copy of the original, if you do not hear within, say, a month.

74 pence may not be much but spending it unnecessarily is not money saving!

magpiecottage

Quentin wrote: »

Yes, good points well made!

The "professional" adviser above telling us not to bother with recorded delivery is way out, and clearly impervious to all the benefits of paying that extra 74p. (Which is not limited to just proving delivery!)

I do NOT provide professional advice to consumers - I am simply telling you why the rules make it superfluous.

magpiecottage

Quentin wrote: »

When you use your own garage/bodyshop, then you are the customer who they will want to keep. Whereas when you use the insurers chosen repairer then the customer is not you but the insurance company. (Big conflict of interest).

Of course, unless you have a lot of accidents, the insurer might want to keep your business too.

Quentin wrote: »

Your own garage will fight hard any cost saving measures put to them by the insurer (whereas their "own" repairer has little incentive to "rock the boat", and will meekly comply).

That works both ways. Yes the repairer could skimp on quality but on the other hand if you go direct, you are only one customer. If you are unhappy, they have plenty more.

An insurer, though, will be a big customer providing a lot of business. If they get complaints about you, they are likely to go elsewhere.

It is the same principle as supermarkets only buying perfectly shaped fruit.

Quentin wrote: »

And of course many main dealer bodyshops offer better guarantees than do insurer bodyshops.

Its some years since I had a prang. The insurer guaranteed the repair for the rest of the life of the vehicle. I am not entirely sure how a main dealer can beat that.

If the car was new and I planned to keep it for a long time that would very much be a reason why I would want the insurer to take responsibility for the repair.

Of course not all guarantees are for life - something to think about when you buy the policy.

Quentin wrote: »

And you know the staff at your own garage and have a relationship with them.

Can't argue with that. The garage I use is run by a friend - and I would use him to avoid a claim but if I am going to have to make a claim I will let the insurer do it.

Quentin wrote: »

When we use our own garage, then maybe we don't have the ombudsman to fall back on should there be problems, but we still have all the other consumer protection available to everyone.

I agree with that and I realise I have a better idea of the rules than most people but if the garage ceased trading you would be stuffed. The insurer is unlikely to and, even if they did, you could get 90% back from the financial services compensation scheme.

In the end, it is for the OP to decide. If they are comfortable with their own garage doing it then fine - but there are risks involved in doing so that can be avoided, or at least reduced, by using the insurer's repairer.

I am simply giving information so they can make an informed decision. They are the ones who must take responsibility for that decision and its consequences for them.

lisyloo

Even if Royal Mail bother to record delivery (they didn't with the last two items I sent) if it then gets lost by the insurer (which I suspect is more likely) then you are in the same boat.

My personal experience is that sending items recorded delivery means the companies don't try to pull a fast one.
You are correct there are no guarantees, a meteorite could land on the Royal Mail van or the postman could be struck by lightning or the mail could spontaneously combust
I am not saying these things can't happen, but in my view and experience of making complaints and lapsing insurance, taking some proactive steps generally works and reduces a lot of hassle.

74 pence may not be much but spending it unnecessarily is not money saving!

I disagree with your views and I accept you have different views to me, that's fine.
As long as all the points have been made to the OP (and others) to make up their own mind then I think that's fine and we should agree to disagree.
It's a suggestion that people can chose to take or disregard.

I am simply telling you why the rules make it superfluous.

It would possibly save 6-12 months in this case.
Legally I agree you would end up in the same situation, you'd just have to wait a long time (and probably spend more than 74p in stamps to the ombudsman), but lets let people make up their own mind.

I have used free proof of posting many times as well to good effect.
The last time was when I had to return some good on approval.
This was safe as the company owned the goods and it was their risk.
Guess what - they said they were lost in the post.
I said - tough - I have proof they were posted and it's your risk under a "contract of bailment".

adamc260

Seems a few insurers are doing this now, I guess to recoop some costs ... Aviva do it but they made it really clear in my documentation etc when I purchased the policy.