Esure Rip Off

Andypendle

Hi
I had my patio doors smashed last week by thieves who stole my cars keys from a drawer and then stole my car. Esure are telling me that they will only pay the cost of replacing the glass but, as their experts who attended said that the frame wasn't re-glazeable, I would have to pay to replace the frame. This will cost me around £1000 which I am obviously unhappy about as, prior to this, I had a perfectly working and secure patio door. On the phone, I was told that it was down to me to maintain the rest of the door but I'm not sure how I am supposed to have maintained a door just in case somebody smashed it!
Can anyone help with this? Does it sound reasonable? Surely it is eSure's responsibility to get me back to the condition that I was in previously? They simply aren't interested, I was promised a phone call from somebody higher up that never came but have had 2 letters confirming their decision.
On top of this, whilst claiming for the contents in the car, they are asking me to fill in a sheet detailing all of the contents in my house. The small print on this letter says that they are within their rights to consider my insurance as void if I do not have enough contents insurance. This just seems to me to be a particularly un-subtle way of trying to worm out of paying me.
Long rant over but any help or guidance would be appreciated.
Thanks

mikey72

Write a letter of complaint, then refer the complaint to the FOS if they still refuse to pay.

dacouch

How much contents cover do you have

dunstonh

Seems like a valid reason to complain.

he small print on this letter says that they are within their rights to consider my insurance as void if I do not have enough contents insurance.

That is generally not true either. for argument sake, if they found your sum insured was 50% of your contents value then they can reduce your claim by 50%. However, you dont tend to see it used much unless it looks like fraud or someone trying to pull a fast one or they have a ridiculously low sum insured.

lisyloo

I can understand your frustration, but they are entitled to check that you aren't underinsured.

Send your complain letter in line with their complaints process and I would also send it recorded delivery for 77p.
I don't actually think many things get lost in the post, but companies sometimes try to use this as an excuse and this tends to communicate to them that you won't allow yourself to be fobbed off with that excuse.
The good news if that there is an independent and free ombudsman although that process may not be quick.

I take it you have secured the door temporarily?

FlameCloud

dunstonh wrote: »

Seems like a valid reason to complain.


That is generally not true either. for argument sake, if they found your sum insured was 50% of your contents value then they can reduce your claim by 50%. However, you dont tend to see it used much unless it looks like fraud or someone trying to pull a fast one or they have a ridiculously low sum insured.

From experience, esure and their assorted brands are by far the harshest insurer when it comes to underinsurance, by a country mile.

Have you asked them if they have actually read the report correctly? I dont see why they should only be replacing one part of it.

Andy_L

Andypendle wrote: »

Esure are telling me that they will only pay the cost of replacing the glass but, as their experts who attended said that the frame wasn't re-glazeable, I would have to pay to replace the frame.

What does your policy say about replacing broken windows/patio doors?

Andypendle

Thanks for the responses. I emailed their customer services initially and have had 2 letters re-confirming their position and pointing out the route that I need to follow to further the complaint. Today, however, I have had another letter saying that whilst the contents of the previous letter were correct they had a new proposition: "However, as esure do have some liability in ensuring that your property is repaired I propose splitting the cost of replacing the door". Basically, instead of giving me £323 (the cost of the glass), they would offer half of £1154.50 (less the £50 policy excess - even though I have already paid that to Solaglass). I am still going to be out of pocket here and still feel that it shouldn't cost me anything but I have 2 key questions: 1) Can I take that money in order to get the door fixed but continue following the complaints procedure to try and be paid for the rest? 2) Can I spend that money with any other person to fit the doors or do I have to use their repairer?

I cannot find any specific mention of glass or patio doors in the policy document (even by searching a PDF document) that refers to any potential exclusions so I would have thought that I am on pretty solid ground but they are sticking to the "we are not responsible for wear and tear" line - whereas I wouldn't have to spend anything if I hadn't had my patio glass smashed! The report reads "due to the condition of the frame, we are unable to re-glaze the patio doors".

As for the contents cover, I am pretty sure that I will be covered (£11,900 for Household goods, £5940 for high risk items and £2590 for personal possessions) - it just tasted sour to be getting that at the time of making a genuine claim.

luci

What size of house is it? £12000 is very low and even with the other things added it is still on the low side, but will depend whether it is a one bedroom bungalow or 4 bedroom house.

somalt

They are arguing that the glass has been damaged by an insured event and is covered by the policy. They feel their liability is just the glass but they can't replace just the glass because the frame is in a poor state. They are saying the frame is in a poor state due to wear and tear for example it's a wooden frame and has rotted. That is not an insured event and so they are saying it's not their liability to repair.

But to answer your questions, you should be able to get the repairs done by someone of your choice and you can still refer to the FOS if you take the settlement.

Andy_L

http://www.esure.com/wcm/groups/public/documents/webcontent/wcmprod_es_home_policy_booklet.pdf

Is this the policy document?

Either, as Somalt says, the frame is knackered as a result of wear & tear so not covered or, there is a design flaw in the door such that you can't just replace the glass in which case they won't cover "loss or damage arising from or consisting of...faulty workmanship, design or materials" (pg 37)