Sickness and Employment insurance - with no payout!

Archer1401

I'm sure I cannot be alone with this, but in 1999 I took out a lone with Lombards for the purchase of a car. No insurance was taken out. I successfully completed repayment of the loan. I then took out a second loan (continuing on from the first) in 2003 and was asked if I wanted insurance to cover health and un-employment which I accepted. My work sitation changed and I was moved from a full time employment contract to an open ended employment contract. In 2004 my employment contract terminated. Co-incidentall, I also suffered a colasped vertibre in my upper neck which meant I could not undertake any work for a considerable amount of time. I was given sick notes from my doctor for over 12 months.

I submitted all the sick notes to Lombards and they organised payments for the first 6 months. I was then informed that they only covered sickness payments for 6 months. This was not made clear when I took out the insurance. When I questioned the fact, they then said that my insurance was not valid because my employment circumstances had changed. They have since stated that my insurance was totally invalid because I was not in full time employment and therefore refused to cover any payments that were due.

Are they in their right to do this? It looks like they are just looking for an escape route and they are now pushing me for £3,500 back payments.

Have you any suggestions as to the legality of their position?

I'm not sure that I can use the FO route to complain ...... I live in Jersey and I don't think they have jurisdiction over here? Can anyone advise me otherwise?

Thanks
Archer

Rafter

Archer,

Don't know how it works in Jersey, but in the UK you may have a misselling case against lombard unless they clearly demonstrated that they pointed out the open ended employment contract exclusion.

Payments on a ppi policy are usually limited to a defined period unless you are diagnosed with a fatal condition or are permenantly disabled. 6 months is very low though.

It does sound like a dodgy policy and they are sticking to their wording. However they can only do this if they can clearly demonstrate that the exclusions and payout were explained in enough detail at the point of sale.

R.

Rabiddog_2

You are under an obligation to THEM to report any change in circumstances, Jobwise. I suspect that you did not and therefore are in non-compliance with the T + Cs of the Policy. Personally I never bothered with these PPI policy's as the exclusions and the amount of cover were always very restrictive.