We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Smart Car Stolen
Comments
-
That is fully warranted by a sarky reply in the basis of it being ridiculous. That doesn't affect it being a thing, but its is ridiculous none the less.Deleted_User said:Scrapit said:
Is that a thing? Or are the enhanced CIA integrators from guantanamo filling in whilst on furlough?jk0 said:
GF has now had three phone interviews by the insurers, asking the same questions. Presumably applying voice stress analysis and trying to catch her out giving different answers.DCFC79 said:Any news OP ?No, it's very much a thing if you'd simply looked instead of rushing to put in a snarky reply. Multiple articles show trials at the very least have been going on since 2003, Admiral, Esure and Halifax were doing it way back then. The firms didn't use the analysis as proof of fraud, but rather to flag calls for further investigation of suspicious elementsAdmiral claimed 1/4 of their claims were withdrawn after the customers were told they were being recorded and analysed, when the firm called them back and gave them the opportunity to cancel it (though they did say that might include people who had claimed a car was stolen, and then found it so didn't need to claim).China Pacific (a Fortune Global 500 firm with 139m customers in China) launched it this year for life insurance claimsFor a problem that costs £1bn a year, it's worth them running it and the voice industry is expanding it for all sorts of areas, from improving call handling to helping in recruitment. Heck, I've done a voice recording as part of security for my bank0 -
GF still has no action from insurers, (or even a loan car.) She has an offer of £2k for the wreck, which frankly I think she should take, in view of the state of it.Is there going to be a problem with getting the balance of the value from the insurers though, if we get rid of it? I'm sure they will try to say we should have kept it for them to inspect.GF has nowhere to park it, and needs to buy a new car.0
-
Scrapit said:
That is fully warranted by a sarky reply in the basis of it being ridiculous. That doesn't affect it being a thing, but its is ridiculous none the less.Deleted_User said:Scrapit said:
Is that a thing? Or are the enhanced CIA integrators from guantanamo filling in whilst on furlough?jk0 said:
GF has now had three phone interviews by the insurers, asking the same questions. Presumably applying voice stress analysis and trying to catch her out giving different answers.DCFC79 said:Any news OP ?No, it's very much a thing if you'd simply looked instead of rushing to put in a snarky reply. Multiple articles show trials at the very least have been going on since 2003, Admiral, Esure and Halifax were doing it way back then. The firms didn't use the analysis as proof of fraud, but rather to flag calls for further investigation of suspicious elementsAdmiral claimed 1/4 of their claims were withdrawn after the customers were told they were being recorded and analysed, when the firm called them back and gave them the opportunity to cancel it (though they did say that might include people who had claimed a car was stolen, and then found it so didn't need to claim).China Pacific (a Fortune Global 500 firm with 139m customers in China) launched it this year for life insurance claimsFor a problem that costs £1bn a year, it's worth them running it and the voice industry is expanding it for all sorts of areas, from improving call handling to helping in recruitment. Heck, I've done a voice recording as part of security for my bank
A sarky comment suggesting they don't exist is all the more amusing when it's shown to be hopelessly wrong
0 -
Sounds like you are reading too much between lines that don't exist.Deleted_User said:Scrapit said:
That is fully warranted by a sarky reply in the basis of it being ridiculous. That doesn't affect it being a thing, but its is ridiculous none the less.Deleted_User said:Scrapit said:
Is that a thing? Or are the enhanced CIA integrators from guantanamo filling in whilst on furlough?jk0 said:
GF has now had three phone interviews by the insurers, asking the same questions. Presumably applying voice stress analysis and trying to catch her out giving different answers.DCFC79 said:Any news OP ?No, it's very much a thing if you'd simply looked instead of rushing to put in a snarky reply. Multiple articles show trials at the very least have been going on since 2003, Admiral, Esure and Halifax were doing it way back then. The firms didn't use the analysis as proof of fraud, but rather to flag calls for further investigation of suspicious elementsAdmiral claimed 1/4 of their claims were withdrawn after the customers were told they were being recorded and analysed, when the firm called them back and gave them the opportunity to cancel it (though they did say that might include people who had claimed a car was stolen, and then found it so didn't need to claim).China Pacific (a Fortune Global 500 firm with 139m customers in China) launched it this year for life insurance claimsFor a problem that costs £1bn a year, it's worth them running it and the voice industry is expanding it for all sorts of areas, from improving call handling to helping in recruitment. Heck, I've done a voice recording as part of security for my bank
A sarky comment suggesting they don't exist is all the more amusing when it's shown to be hopelessly wrong
Unless of course you think it is legitimate, which would be very odd unless you are an insurer? Or a troll of course.0 -
You won't get anything from the insurers if you sell the wreck to someone else.jk0 said:GF still has no action from insurers, (or even a loan car.) She has an offer of £2k for the wreck, which frankly I think she should take, in view of the state of it.Is there going to be a problem with getting the balance of the value from the insurers though, if we get rid of it? I'm sure they will try to say we should have kept it for them to inspect.GF has nowhere to park it, and needs to buy a new car.1 -
ontheroad1970 said:
You won't get anything from the insurers if you sell the wreck to someone else.jk0 said:GF still has no action from insurers, (or even a loan car.) She has an offer of £2k for the wreck, which frankly I think she should take, in view of the state of it.Is there going to be a problem with getting the balance of the value from the insurers though, if we get rid of it? I'm sure they will try to say we should have kept it for them to inspect.GF has nowhere to park it, and needs to buy a new car.
What are we to do then? We can't leave the wreck on the road without it being insured. GF needs to transfer her insurance to another car. Sorn it, and pay to store it somewhere until the ombudsman adjudicates?
0 -
That's a decision you have to make. Either cut your losses while you have a buyer or incur costs while you wait.0
-
Why has no one mentioned about the immobiliser? Unless smart cars don't have them?
It is not possible to just start a car by picking or defeating the lock or "hot wiring " a car , no matter what the movies may have you believe
You also need to know the immobiliser code and as that it is almost impossible to crack it appears there's more to this story than were being told
1 -
Homer_home said:Why has no one mentioned about the immobiliser? Unless smart cars don't have them?
It is not possible to just start a car by picking or defeating the lock or "hot wiring " a car , no matter what the movies may have you believe
You also need to know the immobiliser code and as that it is almost impossible to crack it appears there's more to this story than were being toldI know. That's why I thought thief must have used another key. I can only tell you guys what I've been told by gf. I know it sounds like an odd story, but there it is.0 -
Yes it does sound like an odd storyjk0 said:Homer_home said:Why has no one mentioned about the immobiliser? Unless smart cars don't have them?
It is not possible to just start a car by picking or defeating the lock or "hot wiring " a car , no matter what the movies may have you believe
You also need to know the immobiliser code and as that it is almost impossible to crack it appears there's more to this story than were being toldI know. That's why I thought thief must have used another key. I can only tell you guys what I've been told by gf. I know it sounds like an odd story, but there it is.
Is it really so surprising that the insurance company don't believe your gf given they have a lot of experience dealing with "odd" stories and getting to the bottom of what actually happened?
As long as your gf is telling the insurance company the truth of what happened then there will be no come back on her however if she is not they will probably take her to court , they will certainly cancel her insurance and they will make getting car insurance very difficult and very expensive for years to come1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.1K Spending & Discounts
- 246.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.1K Life & Family
- 260.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards