Barclays no Angels

CB18

That's was in reply to a question about the insurance company. Sorry you misunderstood

andyfromotley

CB18 wrote: »

So I paid for the survey and it's not for my benefit,what planet are you from.

Ding Ding Ding!!! Finally we get to the nub of the matter. This survey was for the lender, not for you. You simply paid for it. I'm sorry that this is difficult to understand, usually when we pay for something its ours, not in this case. You paid for it nut its theirs. This is not unusual, i think you will find that someone even posted this part of the T&C's for you upthread, this is the norm.

Once you understand this concept you will start to see your position somewhat differently.

Landofwood

CB18 wrote: »

That's was in reply to a question about the insurance company. Sorry you misunderstood

I understand that you are frustrated because you are not getting the replies you expected.

I can only imagine how stressful this experience has been for you, and I am very sorry for your bad luck.

I hope you made some money from the tabloids as this is likely to be all you will get.

The truth is you bought a house without a survey. They survey that you paid for was not for you, it was for your lender. I understand that this is very confusing, and many many people make the same mistake.

I think it would definitely be worth getting a second opinion on potential repairs for your property, and I also would be interested in hearing the cause identified by the structural engineer.

I wish you all the best, and hope you can put this matter behind you in the future.

andyfromotley

Can we go back to the bit about why your insurance company isnt paying this? It seems to me that this is who your complaint is against. You did have buildings insurance didnt you?

charliewocka

CB18 wrote: »

The insurance company that covered me in 2000 refused to consider it as it was 12 years since I had insurance and the last company I was with when I discovered the problems said my issue was with the lender and refunded my payment.

I've interpreted this to mean that the OP didn't have insurance.......is that correct OP? Why was it 12 years since you had insurance?!

mrginge

CB18 wrote: »

The insurance company that covered me in 2000 refused to consider it as it was 12 years since I had insurance and the last company I was with when I discovered the problems said my issue was with the lender and refunded my payment.

Are you suggesting that you had insurance and that when you made a claim in respect of a condition that you had just discovered, they simply cancelled your insurance and washed their hands of you?

under what grounds?

Why did you not complain about this?

Landofwood

flosswoss21 wrote: »

I've interpreted this to mean that the OP didn't have insurance.......is that correct OP? Why was it 12 years since you had insurance?!

I suspect that a firmer stance from CB18 towards the insurance company from 2000, may yield a positive result.

CB18, focus on the insurance company from 2000.

Actually, focus on both insurance companies, there's an argument that either should cover.

Landofwood

I've been keeping my eye out for this article in the tabloids.

Did anyone catch it?

CB18

I have been told possibly Mon,Tues. I will post the link as previously stated. Thanks for your interest.

TBeckett100

If this is a true story and is going in OP's newspaper of choice then I predict a picture of a woman chewing a wasp, arms folded, looking like her world is about to crumble

The only thing missing is direct references to small children with asthma or ADHD and elderly people.