Insurance2Go - Claim declined!!!! Help

Hillman_Imp

First Post driven by stupidity of above company!
My daughter was in her car showing pictures of my grandchild on her Samsung Galaxy to her grandmother. Granny got out of car and phone fell out as she was getting out of car. Revisited shortly afterwards when realised what had happened - not there. Reported to police and informed service provider. She has since contacted Insurance2Go and unbelieveably they are saying the phone was in the possession of a 3rd party who was not a close relation so they are not paying claim. No doubt if she had told them a lie and said it had fallen out of car on her side then it would have been OK. I fail to see how sitting less than 3 feet away the phone can be viewed as not in her possession. She has contacted them twice to no avail and let them know she will not let matter rest.
Anyone out there able to advise on what next/best course of action should be?
Thanks

spacey2012

Cancel the insurance.
It is not worth the paper it is written on, second post today with stupid excuses not to pay out from this firm.
Do you have accidental cover on house insurance ?

rs65

spacey2012 wrote: »

It is not worth the paper it is written on, second post today with stupid excuses not to pay out from this firm.

How can these claims handlers sleep at night.

I very much doubt that your daughters circumstances are what the insurers intended to exclude.

Make a complaint and escalate to the ombudsman if necessary.

TSx

rs65 wrote: »

How can these claims handlers sleep at night.

I very much doubt that your daughters circumstances are what the insurers intended to exclude.

Make a complaint and escalate to the ombudsman if necessary.

It's a tangent, but to be fair to the claims handlers, they're probably only doing what they're told. There are enough threads posted about issues with claims by the gadget insurance companies that it's more likely to be the insurers philosophy that's the problem, rather than the individual staff members.

I work for an insurer who I like to feel is good and fair, and when I repudiate claims I feel it's for sound reasons, rather than an attempt to wriggle out of paying - however that doesn't mean I don't feel they make the odd unfair decision (which I will argue). As an example, take the typical matching sets and suites clause - I know the FOS will allow 50% towards undamaged items, but there's no way I can offer that unless a formal complaint is made, otherwise I'm instructed to refer policyholders to the policy conditions. I know 90%+ of insurance companies work the same way in this respect.

Apologies for hijacking the thread, just thought it's a bit unfair to put the blame on the individuals rather than the company.

rs65

TSx wrote: »

Apologies for hijacking the thread, just thought it's a bit unfair to put the blame on the individuals rather than the company.

I didn't blame them. I asked how they could sleep at night.

Your analogy to matching sets is different. You are offering settlement according to the policy terms which is entirely correct - that's a claims handlers job. It is not their job to consider what the FOS will say - that is up to the policy drafters.

To exclude the OPs claim on those grounds is not, in my opinion, what is intended by the wording. Who knows whether that is the instructions given or one claim handlers interpretation.

magpiecottage

Details of how to complain are given here.

If you have a fax then send it to 0208 1817971 so you get an instant record of receipt.

They have eight weeks from her first expression of dissatisfaction to respond - so remind them of then that was and when the eight weeks expire.

It seems unlikely that FOS would accept that Granny is not a close relation.

Joebo2k

rs65 wrote: »

How can these claims handlers sleep at night.

I very much doubt that your daughters circumstances are what the insurers intended to exclude.

Make a complaint and escalate to the ombudsman if necessary.

They sleep in beds and houses like everyone else. They can afford to put a roof over their heads thanks to the jobs where they have little or no say in how these massive organisations operate.

Unfortunately, some of us don't have the luxury of picking jobs we want and have to pay the bills.

I think your comment is hurtful and directed at people who don't necessarily take enjoyment out of rejecting claims.

If you feel that strongly about it why don't you start by lobbying to have tighter controls enforced by the FCA rather than just slagging people off on a forum!

forgotmyname

Has your anger and frustration been building up for the past 8 1/2 months?

dacouch

forgotmyname wrote: »

Has your anger and frustration been building up for the past 8 1/2 months?

May have been a back log

rs65

Joebo2k wrote: »

I think your comment is hurtful

You need to grow a thicker skin if you intend pursuing a career in claims.