Unfair change of excess?

weejonnie

Quentin wrote: »

Why should you a "broker" get "gripes" over this?

(And again your facts are wrong - insurers get 3 cases free a year, then they are charged £500 a time, though vexatious complaints should be spotted and thrown out)

Yes - I know that but a large insurer like Endsleigh is very likely to have reached the 3 strike limit so I was generalising. My 'gripe' is that all the dice are loaded in favour of the consumer with very few if any recourses available to the broker. If I get a complaint in, no matter how unjustified, I have to weigh up the position. This may mean that for a small complaint I have to settle and pay the customer purely because it will cost less than the £500 it would cost me for the FOS to review (and throw out) the complaint.

For my firm it is hypothetical as we have not yet had more than one complaint a year go to the FOS.

(And as far as I am aware there is no procedure on the FOS for declining to consider any case presented to it, nor are there any penalties or costs to people who raise complaints without merit.)

magpiecottage

weejonnie wrote: »

Generally the company have to acknowledge your complaint within 1 week, make a reply in 4 weeks and a final reply in 8 weeks. The final reply will enclose a leaflet on how to go thrrough the FOS.

This out of date. New rules came in on 1 November 2007 which only require them to acknowledge the complaint "promptly", keep the complainant up to date and reply within 8 weeks.

In view of the small amount there is a very good chance you will accommodated by the insurer (as it costs them £300+ to use the FOS win or lose

Actually £500 now.

as a broker this gripes me as the industry is open to vexatious claims and blackmail, if some unscrupulous people realise it)

Not to mention fraud.

The FSA allows this despite having a statutory duty to work to reduce crime.

However, to get back to the OP's position, to put the excess up and not draw their attention to it is a breach of FSA Principle 7: "A firm must pay due regard to the information needs of its clients, and communicate information to them in a way which is clear, fair and not misleading."

skintandscared_2

Quentin wrote: »

Unnecessarily patronising!

Who has told you that bit of nonsense? (They have mislead you!!!)

(Any excesses you have agreed to pay are NOT required to be stated)

I wasn't remotely trying to be patronising, just trying to help. Apologies if it didn't come across that way. I have my excess stated on my annual certificate of cover and I assumed all policies did. My mistake, clearly. I thought if the OP checked their certificate it might clarify what excess they had actually agreed to, rather than wade through the enormous policy booklet.

vaio

weejonnie wrote: »

........as far as I am aware there is no procedure on the FOS for declining to consider any case presented to it, nor are there any penalties or costs to people who raise complaints without merit......

Maybe worth having a read of DISP 3.3.4. (http://fsahandbook.info/FSA/html/handbook/DISP/3/3) which neatly summarises the reasons why the FOS can decline to consider (or dismiss without considering the merits) any case referred to it by a consumer.

To put numbers on it, about 1 in 6 of initial referrals to the FOS actually make it through to the point where the case becomes chargeable to the complained about company.

On the lack of penalties or costs for failed complaints I guess that the powers that be decided that this was the lesser of two evils when compared to financial institutions treating customers unfairly and the only redress for wronged consumers being hugely (prohibitively?) expensive and time consuming litigation against an opponent with vastly greater resources at their disposal

Quentin

weejonnie wrote: »

.... If I get a complaint in, no matter how unjustified, I have to weigh up the position. This may mean that for a small complaint I have to settle and pay the customer purely because it will cost less than the £500 it would cost me for the FOS to review (and throw out) the complaint.............(And as far as I am aware there is no procedure on the FOS for declining to consider any case presented to it, nor are there any penalties or costs to people who raise complaints without merit.)

Surely you are talking about a "business decision" over whether or not to pay out £500 or make a lesser "goodwill gesture" - but either way, the eventual payer is not of course you!!

You are wrong on how the FOS operate - you need to read up - they don't just routinely turn every complaint they get into a £500 case for the insurer to pay!!

bram2000

I probably wasn't as clear as I could have been. Both the £50 excess (stated three times) and the "Special terms and conditions..." are in the same document, but different pages. The document is my personalised "statement of insurance" - hence I would expect them to provide accurate excess values throughout.

I don't believe I have the original renewal letter, but it appears to be on the statement of insurance that I have downloaded, and doesn't highlight the increase in excess.

Thanks all,
Jon

bram2000

The Insurance company's complaints team have now got back to me and offered to halve the extra £300 excess to £150, making a total of £200 total excess. To be honest I'm still not very happy and am still tempted to take this up with the FOS. I'd be interested to hear of anyone who has been in a similar situation and how it turned out.

chris-j

You made three claims in 2010 therefore this would increase excess with most insurers, I am sure they would have had an option to reduce excess in return for a higher premium. Seems your gripe is about you not reading your document correctly which is your fault. With three claims in one year I'm surprised they still want to insure you - I know its not your fault you got burgled but insurance companies are cherry pickers and would generally want to lose customers with multiple claims.

opinions4u

bram2000 wrote: »

The Insurance company's complaints team have now got back to me and offered to halve the extra £300 excess to £150, making a total of £200 total excess. To be honest I'm still not very happy and am still tempted to take this up with the FOS. I'd be interested to hear of anyone who has been in a similar situation and how it turned out.

That suggests that they think they are in the wrong and might lose if it goes to the FOS.

Go back to them and ask for the full amount as a final offer and take things from there.

But with a claims record like that don't expect future renewals o be friendly!

Dangermac

bram2000 wrote: »

Hi All,

I've been a loyal customers of a particular well known insurance provider for the last 12 years, they have always been pretty good to me, until now. Last week my GF's bike was stolen, and upon trying to make the claim, it came to light that our excess had been increased from £50, as it has been as long as I can remember, to £350. The reason cited for this increase was that we made 3 claims in 2010 (which we did - I was burgled twice).

I was pretty upset about this, as it was never made clear to us during the (automatic) renewal that our excess was being increased. At this point I downloaded my policy document to take a look, and I was shocked with what I found.

The standard policy section of the document stated three times that an excess of £50 applies to any claims - pretty much this whole section looks the same as it always has done. Elsewhere in the document, in a special section titled "Special terms and conditions applicable to your whole policy", there is a single line stating: "In addition to any Excess shown in your Statement of Insurance, any claim is subject to a further Excess of £300".

As far as I'm concerned that's deliberately misleading, as the policy document could easily state the total excess value of £350 in all relevant sections of the document. I'm currently engaging with the complaints process of the insurer, but would like to know people's thoughts on whether or not Endsleigh have any obligation to make such changes clear to customers, as burying the detail in small print seems like something that could easily be argued as unreasonable and unfair.

Thanks,
Jon

You will be getting close to being uninsurable, should the current insurer decide that your claims record is beyond their acceptance criteria.

Personally, unless the bike was of significant value, I wouldnt have made a claim for this.

The insurer should certainly be making you aware of the excess if it has increased. However, given the recent claims, their approach seems not unreasonable.

I would stongly recommend that you take some advice regarding insurance/claims going forward, because you may struggle to obtain competitive insurance with your current record.

DM