Help- insurers not transparent

alistair.long

Hi, I would handle this a little diffrent. I would get a expert to look at the work needed. My expert would be a structural surveyer. He will then give you a quote as to how much it will cost to repair. If it costs more the structural survayer can be sued by you
Before calling one out, ask if they can give you a quote for the work, and that if the surveyer will put the cost in the report.

If the surveyer makes a report and the cost is a lot greater then what the insurance are offering then you can charge the insurance also, if less then you may have lost your costs.

Hope this helps

mexicanhat

Is the specification of the work to be undertaken the same. Is it a like for like comparison ?

The information they have sent you should allow you to see how many meters etc they have allowed for each area. In addition the contractor's cost may take into things that they know about your policy. They will often not allow for the cost to match undamaged items (kitchen units etc ) if they know Insurers will not pay for it. Does your quote include any undamaged items? Most Insurers use medium sized contrators so a small contractor can generally beat them on price. If the difference is solely price then you may wish to get another quote or request that they do so.

FlameCloud

alistair.long wrote: »

Hi, I would handle this a little diffrent. I would get a expert to look at the work needed. My expert would be a structural surveyer. He will then give you a quote as to how much it will cost to repair. If it costs more the structural survayer can be sued by you
Before calling one out, ask if they can give you a quote for the work, and that if the surveyer will put the cost in the report.

If the surveyer makes a report and the cost is a lot greater then what the insurance are offering then you can charge the insurance also, if less then you may have lost your costs.

Hope this helps

Why would you appoint a strucutural surveyor to disucuss figures? You would surely want a quantity surveyor, if anything. And would you really be willing to pay for it yourself? The insurers wont.

theJudge

FlameCloud wrote: »

Policies will specifically exlclude costs to prepare a claim.

As I said, it is not a case of the insurers building cutting corners it will the majority of the time be as a result that their rates are lower than normal rates because they wanted a contract.

Policies will try to exclude as many costs as possible. However, if a policyholder has had to do work that an insurer should have had to do as part of their duty to indemnify, then I would suggest that the policyholder direct any such terms to [EMAIL="unfair.terms@fsa.gov.uk"]unfair.terms@fsa.gov.uk[/EMAIL].

I don't have any problem with builders who are legitimate and cheap but, in my experience, the claims managment company tried to foist a cowboy on to me and didn't bat an eyelid when I pointed out that the accreditations that the builder said he had, he didn't have and to make this claim is illegal. The claims management company also stated that the cowboy builder was trading as a limited company, by using a similarly named legitimate company. Again when I complained they didn't bat an eyelid. The claims management company is 1 of the biggest in the world. Given this, why should any policyholder have trust in the insurance industry?

magpiecottage

theJudge wrote: »

I don't have any problem with builders who are legitimate and cheap but, in my experience, the claims managment company tried to foist a cowboy on to me and didn't bat an eyelid when I pointed out that the accreditations that the builder said he had, he didn't have and to make this claim is illegal. The claims management company also stated that the cowboy builder was trading as a limited company, by using a similarly named legitimate company. Again when I complained they didn't bat an eyelid. The claims management company is 1 of the biggest in the world. Given this, why should any policyholder have trust in the insurance industry?

Do you mean claims management company? They are appointed by policyholders to deal with the claim.

If, on the other hand, you mean a loss adjuster they are engaged by the insurer and act as their agent. So if you are unhappy you need to bypass the loss adjuster and complain to the insurer.

bingbong1978

magpiecottage wrote: »

Do you mean claims management company? They are appointed by policyholders to deal with the claim.

If, on the other hand, you mean a loss adjuster they are engaged by the insurer and act as their agent. So if you are unhappy you need to bypass the loss adjuster and complain to the insurer.

Loss Adjusters are called Claims Management Co's..

mattymoo

bingbong1978 wrote: »

Loss Adjusters are called Claims Management Co's..

Well that's just insulted a lot of loss adjusters.

Loss Adjusters - appointed by insurer and paid for by the insurer. They have formal complaints procedures in place and can have chartered status.

Loss Assessors - appointed by the policyholder to manage the claim and push for a better settlement. Quality is variable.

Claims Management Companies - tout for business for personal injury claims, misselling claims and the like. Completed unregulated a hotbed of sharp practice and un met promises.

bingbong1978

mattymoo wrote: »

Well that's just insulted a lot of loss adjusters.

Loss Adjusters - appointed by insurer and paid for by the insurer. They have formal complaints procedures in place and can have chartered status.

Loss Assessors - appointed by the policyholder to manage the claim and push for a better settlement. Quality is variable.

Claims Management Companies - tout for business for personal injury claims, misselling claims and the like. Completed unregulated a hotbed of sharp practice and un met promises.

I think you will find if you look up any LA website they will refer to themselves as being Claim Management Co's (amongst other things).

theJudge

Loss adjusting is just part of the role that the claims management company e.g. Crawford & Co. carry out. In essence the service involves.

i) Doing a site visit to investigate the claim.
ii) Doing background checks on the policyholder to see if you can avoid the claim e.g. undeclared criminal record.
iii) Creating a specfication of work and list of materials
iv) Appointing tradesmen
v) Managing tradesmen
vi) Negotiating a cash settlement, if required, with a policyholder.
vii) Managing communications between insurer and policyholder

1 of the main benefits an insurer gains from employing a claims management company is that they can distance themselves from the lies and delays that the claims management company will do in order to deter the policyholder from pursuing his claim. For this reason when you start to experience problems, revert back to the insurer and insist that they sort it out themselves. They are not allowed but will try to just re-direct you back to the claims management company so you need to persist. It's pointless using the claims management company complaint's process as your contract is with the insurer and your complaint should therefore be made to the insurer. Another tip is refuse to engage with the insurer or claims management company by phone as you'll need to file a data protection request to obtain recordings of any calls they've saved to demonstrate the lies that you're likely to experience. If you communicate by email or writing, you have a paper trail to refer back to. You should be able to use any mechanism of communication you desire so fax/email are the best methods to reduce the delays to a minimum.

bingbong1978

theJudge wrote: »

1 of the main benefits an insurer gains from employing a claims management company is that they can distance themselves from the lies and delays that the claims management company will do in order to deter the policyholder from pursuing his claim.

Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense!!

If somebody has a valid claim the only person that can make a decision is the Insured whether to pursue their claim.

OK, so I gather you did not have a particulary pleasant experience with your claim however, this is not par for the course, i can assure you.