Big hammer, little nut.

colbee

uktim29 wrote: »

But he's still only doing his job!

I believe several wars, including WW2, have thrown up many instances of people 'only doing their job'. This is not a 'get out of jail' card. Warden Hodges has a lot to answer for.

uktim29

colbee wrote: »

I believe several wars, including WW2, have thrown up many instances of people 'only doing their job'. This is not a 'get out of jail' card. Warden Hodges has a lot to answer for.

It takes 2 to start a war! And to date this hasn't been call center staff.

colbee

uktim29 wrote: »

It takes 2 to start a war! And to date this hasn't been call center staff.

Nah, it takes a cunning plan, that's all - it's why a whole flock of sheep can be kept in line by one man and his dog, although I suspect many of the sheep would just follow each other into the abbatoir without being driven.

dinglebert

colbee wrote: »

Dinglebert, you seem to have attended the same school of English comprehension as someone else who has either not properly read what I wrote or has wilfully misinterpreted it. If you do have a problem comprehending plain English then I am unable to enlighten you.
Smileypigface has at once grasped the essence of what I am saying - read that post and see if things are any clearer.

No I understood exactly what you did and said but you're still wrong.

You took out an insurance policy on behalf of your mother-in-law. You paid for it. A year later you wished to cancel the policy only to discover that the only person who could do this was your mother-in-law as it was deemed by the insurance company to be her policy and not yours.

I stand by my point the policy as it is in your mother-in-laws name and is for her benefit it is her policy and not yours. The policy had a condition which meant it has to be cancelled or it is deemed to be continuing. The only person who can do this is the policy holder.

Now two things may have happened

1. Your mother-in-law was aware that you were taking out the policy and agreed to you doing it. In which case she has to accept the terms and conditions of the contract of which she is the beneficary.

2. Your mother-in-law was completely unaware of the insurance policy and did not know you were taking it out. In this case it could be considered that when the box online asked the policyholder to tick that they agree to the terms and conditions then you in effect ticked this as the policyholder that you were impersonating the policyholder.

Now which part of your story have I failed to grasp.

dangeroussports

Its the same as with mobile phone service providers.

I got given a contract mobile as a present a few years ago. At the end of the second year I called up and asked to cancel. No they said, they wanted the person who had brought the phone to call up and cancel.

Even though the moolah was coming out of my bank, I even had a password and clearance with my details on the account to review and change things.

Silly isnt it! But hey ho I understand that they have a responsibility and a touch of consumerism too.

There is no point in moaning and whinging and moaning about it.

I feel so sorry for the OP since this must be a very stressful time considering he is looking after elderly folk who do not even know they had insurance.

In these circumstances I would expect the company to work with the poster to come to some solution. However there are people out there who have manipualted the system so I can understand the company to have a blanket policy due to so many liars out there.

colbee

Dinglebert, At the time of application there was no policy holder- only an applicant. There has been no impersonation; nowhere in the application process is there anything that states that the person making the online application has to be the person who will benefit. How many 91 year olds do you know who have a PC?
If you really want to know about fraud, deception, pecuniary advantage and other such esoteric contraventions of law I suggest you do a bit of swotting.
I think you have been reading too many crime comics.
For the information of anyone who might think otherwise, this contretemps has not been stressful and in fact has been invigorating and entertaining. I little realised that the Big Hammers have lots of volunteer Little Hammers (a sort of Hammers Cadet Corps), all ready to crack we little nuts. The Big Hammer School of Propaganda is clearly a recruiting success.

oops_a_daisy

I had the same thing happen to me. I took out an insurance contents policy for my Nana and paid for it on my card - I organised it because I could go through Quidco and get her a better deal. 1 year on I shopped around and got her a better deal elsewhere so I took out a new policy but when I tried to cancel the first one at renewal I was told that I couldnt cancel it as I did not have power of attorney. I had to get my mum who does have power of attorney to make the phone call. I suppose I could have lied and just said that I had power of attorney because it did seem a bit ridiculous at the time but it soon got sorted out with a phone call from my Mum.

Errata

I little realised that the Big Hammers have lots of volunteer Little Hammers (a sort of Hammers Cadet Corps), all ready to crack we little nuts. The Big Hammer School of Propaganda is clearly a recruiting success

colbee

Check the thread title. Simple really.