Mis-sold contents cover

ladeeda

pyuicd wrote: »

Posters shouldn't make accusations of lying and expect someone not to defend themselves.



There are two separate policies here, it has nothing to do with terms and conditions. I haven't paid 'extra' I have actually paid for two policies. Surely them starting over two weeks apart is an absurdity that implies that I did not agree to this insurance at the same time i took out the buildings insurance, otherwise they would have started at the same time and been a single payment. And it makes no logical sense for me to ask for insurance on buildings and contents to start on different dates. Does that not seem very odd to you?

I think it sounds odd. Contents insurance is advisable but not compulsory but I'm fairly sure you didn't ask for advice on whether you should have the cover or not.

Many with PPI did not know they had it or were paying for it either - if you didn't agree to and sign for the insurance, then you shouldn't have it.
Ask the insurance company for copies of the signed DD's and both the contracts. If you signed & dated them both at the same time the dates will show this. Then you may have somewhere to start.

pyuicd

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

That makes the fact that you continued to pay for the extra policy for two years even more suspect. Don't you ever check your statements?

This was explained in my very first post and then elaborated on in post #9, this is not new information, you are being selective with your reading.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

Have you attempted to complain to the Bank yet? I'm sure they'll find your link to "Risk Aversion" as fascinating as I did.;)

Unfortunately, I was forced to spell it out in black and white to people who simply couldn't comprehend that not everyone wants contents insurance. A thread derailing that really wasn't needed but fortunately Wikipedia came to my rescue

My complaint isn't with a bank, but with an estate agent who arranged my insurance, mortgage and solicitors. I have already spoken to the insurance company regarding it, it was a recorded call when i found out I had been paying two policies. The guy on the phone pretty much said it had been mis-sold and called through to his manager about it straight away. He had the benefit of hearing me tell him repeatedly that I did not have contents insurance, before he told me all the details, at which point he agreed it was very odd the insurance started on different dates.

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

In the absence of any evidence to support your complaint, the Bank will look at suitability-unless your house was empty all this time I think you'll find that they will reject your complaint.

House was empty for approx 6 months after purchase, but you may be right sadly. As I said in an earlier reply I'm going to look through the paperwork more to see what I have. It would be also interesting to see what the estate agent says about it if i confront her.

pyuicd

ladeeda wrote: »

I think it sounds odd. Contents insurance is advisable but not compulsory but I'm fairly sure you didn't ask for advice on whether you should have the cover or not.

Many with PPI did not know they had it or were paying for it either - if you didn't agree to and sign for the insurance, then you shouldn't have it.
Ask the insurance company for copies of the signed DD's and both the contracts. If you signed & dated them both at the same time the dates will show this. Then you may have somewhere to start.

Thank you very much, you're right. If I can get the copies of the contracts and DD's it might well prove my point. If they are dated the same day but one was held back for a period of two weeks it strongly backs my argument that we agreed on buildings insurance but contents was supposed to be 'wait and see'. Hopefully this would place burden of proof on the estate agent to show that i gave them the go ahead afterwards. Not sure about this second part but if i make a recorded call to the estate agent confronting them about the situation they will probably contradict this evidence straight away. Again, thank you!

roonaldo

ladeeda wrote: »

Many with PPI did not know they had it or were paying for it either.

But this isnt PPI. It's not sold the same way and complaints are not assessed the same way.

dunstonh

Hopefully this would place burden of proof on the estate agent to show that i gave them the go ahead afterwards.

You are making the allegation. The burden of proof is on you. Not them.

This is a post regulation case. So, there should be a statement of demands given to you as well as the policy documents (for the start and the renewal).

You cant compare to PPI as PPI was open ended. Home insurance issues an invitation to renew each year. Thats a lot of paperwork issued.

If the paperwork exists you have your unprovable verbal allegation vs a documented audit trail. If the paperwork doesnt exist then you have a stronger case.

haras_nosirrah

Surely them starting over two weeks apart is an absurdity that implies that I did not agree to this insurance at the same time i took out the buildings insurance, otherwise they would have started at the same time and been a single payment. And it makes no logical sense for me to ask for insurance on buildings and contents to start on different dates. Does that not seem very odd to you?[/QUOTE]


nope - buildings insurance starts on exchange, contents starts on completion so usually these would start on different dates (as you are responsible for the building from exchange but have no belongings in the property until completion)

How come you are paying buildings insurance on a flat anyway? Aren't these usually covered by service charges?

pyuicd

haras_nosirrah wrote: »

nope - buildings insurance starts on exchange, contents starts on completion so usually these would start on different dates (as you are responsible for the building from exchange but have no belongings in the property until completion)

It was simultaneous exchange and completion

haras_nosirrah wrote: »

How come you are paying buildings insurance on a flat anyway? Aren't these usually covered by service charges?

Maisonette, no service charge.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

pyuicd wrote: »

No one needs contents insurance.

Correct and to go further, nor do you need Building Insurance either. Or Car insurance. So long as you are averse to the risk, you can do without and save yourself about £30 a month.

In the meantime, my house insuarce over the yaers, has repaired my roof after a storm, replaced windows and painted my hallway. replaced a settee, for more than I bought it for.

But then again, OP has not claimed, therefor it was missold.

magpiecottage

pyuicd wrote: »

I am a risk taker

And one of the risks you took was

pyuicd wrote: »

taking my eye off the ball

and possibly

If i did receive a letter regarding home insurance from the insurer, I would have scanned it and assumed it was for my buildings cover i had purchased.

Learn from it and move on.

pyuicd

magpiecottage wrote: »

And one of the risks you took was



and possibly

Learn from it and move on.

I will be learning from it and moving on, no need to be rude when i'm asking for advice though.