Elderly Uncle Ripped Off

dacouch

Quentin wrote: »

Are you certain the house doesn't have a historical incident of subsidence, which might explain the subsidence loading mentioned by the (former) insurer?

Was my suspicion as well as it's not an unusual price for Zurich to charge where they've paid out on a subsidence claim.

I hope for the guy there was no previous subsidence claim as transferring the cover can cause all sorts of problems

Quentin

dacouch wrote: »

I hope for the guy there was no previous subsidence claim as transferring the cover can cause all sorts of problems

If that is the answer to this It will be a problem for the horsewidow to solve as presumably she just said no previous subsidence in answer to the question when taking out the new policy!

ConMan

But surely it's up to the insurer to decide what loading they add on to the policy. If they think there is a risk of subsidence, then they will add a risk. They make the rules for their own UW and pricing structure, not the consumer.

I don't see what the problem is here, customer has been getting renewals through, and I assume, keeps paying them. It's up to the customer to check the price and cover, I doubt the insurer will inform you that you can get more cover at a cheaper price with a different insurer.

FOREVER21

Have you access to how much the premiums were for previous years, has this apparently excessive amount been paid for a number of years, or is this years been subjected to a price hike?


I would try and get all the information I could and wait to see what the company says.


Whilst as others have said an insurance company can ask for what ever sum they want and an individual can always go elsewhere.


I don't know if they will help but if you get no joy with the insurance company, try telephoning the Ombudsman, explain the position and they will tell you if it falls within their remit. You have nothing to loose.

dacouch

Quentin wrote: »

If that is the answer to this It will be a problem for the horsewidow to solve as presumably she just said no previous subsidence in answer to the question when taking out the new policy!

I've seen similar a few times, there's generally an old subsidence claim.

The policy is generally an old Building Society Policy Zurich have inherited (Normally from Eagle Star). The premium is made higher due to the policy being so old the D.O.B was never collected so an age discount is not included.

It's normally made worse due to Zurich increasing the premiums in that particular post code due to them having on record a subsidence claim for the post code area and them applying a loading to business from that post code.

You can normally get them down to circa £600 with the D.O.B discount, adding contents (Which normally generates a much bigger discount for combining the covers than the contents costs) and opting for a £250 excess as (They may have changed) do not cap the discount they allow for an excess.

If the gentleman is in hospital for some time, the unoccupancy at the start of the policy could also be an issue...

Quentin

dacouch wrote: »

I've seen similar a few times, there's generally an old subsidence claim......

If this is the scenario and horsewidow has acted rashly, then Uncle will be able to save up a tidy sum on not paying for insurance (as Zurich may not want him back, and the new insurer may be so unhappy they cancel the policy, and no-one else will take it on)

dacouch

Quentin wrote: »

If this is the scenario and horsewidow has acted rashly, then Uncle will be able to save up a tidy sum on not paying for insurance (as Zurich may not want him back, and the new insurer may be so unhappy they cancel the policy, and no-one else will take it on)

In my experience, Zurich never take back a customer who has claimed for Subsidence and then insured elsewhere.

Ironically I used to lose quite a few Zurich customers to Saga when they went through a phase of having a badly written Subsidence question. Saga took on loads of business and then off loaded it when they discovered it had a previous subsidence claim which was normally when the property was being sold and the buyers solicitor wanted a letter confirming the Insurer was aware of the subsidence claim and would transfer cover to the new owner.

Saga would refuse cover and the customer would call asking for Zurich to offer cover. They never ever would and as this was always a day or so before exchange, the house sale normally failed or the sale price was negotiated downwards.

It could be a case of no subsidence claim and just a very old Zurich / Old Eagle Star Policy that does not have the D.O.B and age of house discounts though

margaretclare

Please don't tar all of us 80-year olds with the same brush!

We check all our regular payments at least annually, when they come up for renewal. Car insurance, house insurance, utilities, you name it.

I can't understand why Uncle had no contents cover! In the event of e.g. a house fire, the buildings cover is fine because the house will still be there. Contents cover is essential. If you work out how much it would cost to replace every scrap of your household equipment, furniture, it would cost a fortune. I know. I lived through a domestic fire in 1986. I don't know what we'd have done without contents cover. Every scrap of frozen food in the freezer had to be replaced, together with the freezer.

rs65

horsewidow wrote: »

Nobody forced him to renew??? An 87 year old man being told this was the going rate???? Is that good practice?

You mention insurer of long standing. He hasn't always been 87.

horsewidow wrote: »

I got him cover to include also contents, emergency call out, accidental damage and boiler cover for £181.00 with Saga.

Is the house unoccupied? Do Saga know?


Do Saga know it is you taking out the policy and not him?

horsewidow wrote: »

As an aside, I have written to them (as suggested) and mentioned the loading for subsidence is incorrect (according to all other insurers) and if this is the case, they were never on risk for this peril, so some return of premium is reasonable (you cannot insure a risk which does not exist). I'll see how that pans out.

They have been on risk for the peril. The risk does exist - you need to research how subsidence can happen. Similarly, they are on risk for earthquake regardless of how low frequency the risk is.




OP, don't underestimate the responsibility on your shoulders in arranging cover for another. You need to be absolutely certain that your answers to all questions are 100% accurate. You just need to read this forum for a while to see how badly people can be at arranging their own insurance, never mind insurance for others.

dacouch

Chandlers Ford looks like it's in the middle of an area of London Clay according to this geological map...


http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~imw/jpg/hantmap.jpg