Insurance voided due to underinsurance. Help please!

suali_uk

Thanks selden, sounds like I should hold off any legal consultation until I hear from esure and the FOS in final...

Citizen_Jones_2

Same problem here.

Been with esure for 3/4 years, moved house after our renewal date. Never claimed before and had to as I damaged my laptop.

They asked me to fill in a 'value at risk' form. I checked with them at least three times about it, they were very relaxed and said I didn't have to be accurate and obviously I'd have more items because it's been 3/4 years since taking the insurance out. Plus we have an extra room which meant we could move items in that were in storage.

After completing the value at risk form it came in a good 10k+ more. They replied with a letter stating we're grossly under insured. They talk about a theft of an item, we haven't even claimed for a theft.


Basically, a bunch of robbing !!!!!!!s

suali_uk

So true, I can empathise with you. We r left uninsured for buildings and contents and in limbo until they give final response and ombudsman decision. Can't even use my home emergency policy or legal cover as they have cancelled / voided everything. Feel so angry and betrayed.... Makes my blood boil every time I think about it, happy to take premiums without valuing goods but then when it comes to covering risk do everything they can to avoid!

Magzy

Hi, I would just like to make a comment regarding Sheilas Wheels,(ESURE). I have been writing to the CEO Mr Peter Woods [EMAIL="peter.wood@esure.com"]peter.wood@esure.com[/EMAIL] Dont know why Im giving the email address because he doesn't acknowledge any emails. He seems rude, not to do so. Im sure he's getting paid a shed load too.
I took out Sheilas Wheels home contents insurance, then went away the day after, came back a fortnight later with letters on the mat and the last one from them said that they had cancelled our policy because I didnt admit to two "Incidents" that had happened with the previous insurers. I say Incident, because we never gained anything from them, one case was were we had a broken laptop screen and later decided not to go ahead with the claim, got it back unrepaired through Axa, the next was just a phone call enquiry,to Ehome (Aviva) to see if we were covered, and that was all, so I didnt actually think we had any claims to admit to.
I have now since been in touch with both Axa and Aviva and Axa have now removed the claim from the Database and now Aviva have also agreed that a phone call enquiry was unfair.. On both occasion I contacted the CEO of each company and the matters with them has been resolved. I am still trying to get in touch with the CEO of Esure but to no avail. I would now like my "Cancellation - Void" removed from the database as its now more expensive to insure our contents. Although Aviva did a really good deal for me on the insurance taking into account that I didnt want to be penalised because of the misunderstandings.

Basically Sheilas Wheels have a lot to answer for, they are sharks.. stay away even if they are cheap.. We haven't actually made any claims regarding any insurance for at least 12 years..

FlameCloud

Magzy wrote: »

Hi, I would just like to make a comment regarding Sheilas Wheels,(ESURE). I have been writing to the CEO Mr Peter Woods [EMAIL="peter.wood@esure.com"]peter.wood@esure.com[/EMAIL] Dont know why Im giving the email address because he doesn't acknowledge any emails. He seems rude, not to do so. Im sure he's getting paid a shed load too.
I took out Sheilas Wheels home contents insurance, then went away the day after, came back a fortnight later with letters on the mat and the last one from them said that they had cancelled our policy because I didnt admit to two "Incidents" that had happened with the previous insurers. I say Incident, because we never gained anything from them, one case was were we had a broken laptop screen and later decided not to go ahead with the claim, got it back unrepaired through Axa, the next was just a phone call enquiry,to Ehome (Aviva) to see if we were covered, and that was all, so I didnt actually think we had any claims to admit to.
I have now since been in touch with both Axa and Aviva and Axa have now removed the claim from the Database and now Aviva have also agreed that a phone call enquiry was unfair.. On both occasion I contacted the CEO of each company and the matters with them has been resolved. I am still trying to get in touch with the CEO of Esure but to no avail. I would now like my "Cancellation - Void" removed from the database as its now more expensive to insure our contents. Although Aviva did a really good deal for me on the insurance taking into account that I didnt want to be penalised because of the misunderstandings.

Basically Sheilas Wheels have a lot to answer for, they are sharks.. stay away even if they are cheap.. We haven't actually made any claims regarding any insurance for at least 12 years..

Esure and Sheilas wheels both ask for claims, losses or damage within the last three years, not just claims. So, you were wrong not to disclose them. Had you advised them, their website would not have allowed a quotation and would have told you to call them.

Whether Aviva consider it unfair or not is irrelevent, they are not the ones asking the question.

suali_uk

FlameCloud wrote: »

Esure and Sheilas wheels both ask for claims, losses or damage within the last three years, not just claims. So, you were wrong not to disclose them. Had you advised them, their website would not have allowed a quotation and would have told you to call them.

Whether Aviva consider it unfair or not is irrelevent, they are not the ones asking the question.

R u the undercover esure CEO here? If not How can u defend this company in any way. It seems to me that esure/ sheila's wheels consider people irrelevant! How else can they justify voiding insurance cover and leaving people with heartache of having to beg for insurance cover elsewhere paying higher premiums due to ensures decision to void rather than discussing a problem an helping customers put it right?

FlameCloud

Sadly not. They can however justify it quite easily by basing a contract on the answers which people give when taking it out which turn out to be entirely false. Some would say deliberatly misleading.

System

suali_uk wrote: »

The gold jewellery which caused the underinsurance was worth £2,769 as per original receipts but it was longstanding jewellery and we had no idea it had increased in value four fold until we were burgled and visited the jeweller to ask what it would cost to replace as per receipts we had. .

So you realised you were heavily underinsured at the moment you visited the jewellers and were told what the replacement value would be?
Yet you went ahead and made a claim. What did you expect the company's reaction to be?

Citizen_Jones_2

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

So you realised you were heavily underinsured at the moment you visited the jewellers and were told what the replacement value would be?
Yet you went ahead and made a claim. What did you expect the company's reaction to be?

I'd expect the company to have a discussion with them about the claim. Not cancel it like some !!!!ing criminals.

mildred1978

suali_uk wrote: »

My points from their letters is as follows:

I don't want to argue website help quotes and policy wording etc. But will point out that I like millions just renew annual insurance getting the cheapest quote and then file docs away once renewed. We don't sit down and go through small print. For example I didn't know about 1/3 max high risk element of cover. I simply thought £30k was for everything and we estimated our contents no more than 30k. Cunningham lyndsey assessed true value to be £37k, which was inflated in my view. so we weren't far off.

Having now read the policy docs in detail it doesn't say anything about what ratio of high risk goods would void a policy though esure state their underwriting criteria allows only 1/3 high risk and they wouldn't have quoted if they had known high risk value at 2/3. They have not provided any excerpt from an underwriting manual to suggest that this is their underwriting criteria, despite quoting many other points.

The split was pointed out quite clearly on the first page of your insurance schedule, which asks you (in bold) to check the figures, but you didn't bother? They asked you to check on the covering letter too. Do you think they ask you to check the documents twice for the hell of it?

I can understand you not reading the whole policy booklet (although I and many others do), but not to read the confirmation letter? That's pure laziness IMO. The confirmation letter and schedule are not 'small print'. They cost money to produce, and are produced for a reason!