Accidental Damage (Contents Insurance) question

InsideInsurance

Not advising, giving an opinion

Quentin

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Not advising, giving an opinion.

A poster starts a thread asking a specific question, and you seize on it to post misinformation wrongly saying he can get what he wants with an insurer you regularly "mention" here!

And when pointed out you are wrong, your "excuse" is that it is just your "opinion", which it seems you are happy to leave up without a correction!

No wonder insurance "professionals" get treated with some caution here.

InsideInsurance

I explicitly wrote that it is subject to my memory and not a statement of fact and also provide a direct link to the relevant document so that the OP, or others, can validate my memory.

Technically I could have also stated it was at X date when I last looked and that it might have changed since that date but felt the link through to the document along with the statement of not being 100% positive I felt was sufficient to prompt the OP to check and not buy blindly.

You will also note that I also mention DL/ RBS Ins, Aviva, Admiral/sister brands and Confused.com frequently, some I have worked with, some I havent, all of which I have done anaylsis on, none of which are my current client. I probably mention confused the most of any one and yet it is only one of their competitors that I have worked with directly.

Quentin

There seems little point you posting a uthread related suggestion if it's based pirely on your memory if you know it could be corrupt! You tell us you work in insurance so should presumably be well aware of the need to be accurate.

Why can't you just stand corrected, and amend your wrong advice?

InsideInsurance

I accept it was incorrect, as far as I am aware didn't deny it. If you scroll up you'll note you launched your allegations before I had had an opportunity to respond to someone pointing out I was wrong.

Quentin

Others reading the way you have "responded" to my "allegations" will see that only after all this you now tell us your post was incorrect, yet still refuse to correct the original post with its incorrect opinion and naming of what appears to be your "favourite" insurer (judging by the number of times you seize on opportunities like this to mention them"!

And I didn't allege you were wrong, I came out and said you were wrong!

InsideInsurance

Presumably you have more than just a passing interest in continually recommending them??

No, you allege/ imply there were improper reasons for my mentioning them

Something that you notably also havent corrected

Quentin

It does seem strange to jump into the thread and (wrongly) answer the question posed.

Then tell us you were relying purely on your memory when you actually used the opportunity to again mention the one insurer you regularly seem to push here.

And seem reluctant to correct the wrong information in the post!!

(But this is the norm sometimes here when professional insurance people use the forum)

InsideInsurance

Its already been corrected by VictorM.

The chain of the conversation is history, most forums dont allow you to go back and change historic posts anyway, but they get disjointed if people go back any correct things after subsequent posts have been made. I couldnt get VictorM to change their post where they quoted me so it wouldnt make sense if I totally changed what I wrote.

I would argue that if I were to delete mention of it that it would seem more suspicious of my reasoning for making a suggestion in the first place if I remove any that turned out to be wrong.

Quentin

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Its already been corrected by VictorM

VictorM refers to Section C, (Your Liabilities), of the policy (which is irrelevant to your incorrect info - as you are no doubt well aware!)

You could easily edit your post if you wanted to correct it!