New for Old - What are my rights?

nab1273

I accidentally broke my TV and my insurance company have accepted that I have a valid claim for a replacement. I have a "new for old" replacement cover on my policy - again my insurance company agree this is the case. My problem is that the TV I had is now no longer made so the insurance company cannot find an exact replacement on which to base a valuation. They have offered me a settlement based on what I regard as an inferior brand and it is therefore much lower than I want to accept. I was told that the offer is a "new for old" offer because they are offering a TV which does the same as my old one, irrespective of the fact that in my view, it is an inferior item. Do I have to accept this offer and if not, how do I get the insurance company to change the offer? I was also surprised to hear that they gave two offers - one in vouchers to buy from a specific store and another in cash, which was £40-£50 lower. Is this legal or do I have the right to a cash offer at the same price? The insurance company is one of the major players, so I doubt that I am being scammed, but I am not sure if all of their methods are ethical. Thanks in advance for any help. Neil

Browntoa

The replacement is like for like , so you wouldn't for example get an oled replacement for a led TV . Why do you consider the replacement an "inferior model" as you don't explain.

The cash offer could reflect the additional administration costs in doing it or that the specific store enhances their offer as part of the deal with the insurance company. 

Everything is standard industry behaviour

[Deleted User]

It's legal to offer a higher value for vouchers as it costs them less, so you get a higher payout.

Unless you can demonstrate that the brand creates a clear difference in spec, the offer is perfectly valid and ethical. And certainly not a 'scam'!

nab1273

Thanks for the responses so far - I'm not sure about the rules regarding naming brands which is why I haven't named any here. The reason for me calling the brand I've been offered "inferior" is because their TVs are normally much cheaper to buy than the brand of the TV which I broke - I cannot prove it is inferior because that is a matter of personal opinion. I would have thought that a "new for old" offer would allow me to buy the brand that I had originally had rather than a cheaper brand with the same specifications but I don't know if I am correct to think this.

Sandtree

The forums allow naming of brands and you'd have to be fairly risk averse to think Sharp is going to sue you for liable because you say that in your opinion they are a lower quality brand than Sony.

Unless your policy book states that their New For Old policy will be the same brand then there is no guarantee that it will be. What it normally will say is about equivalent specification, and that does implicitly include quality, however you need to focus on things you can empirically prove rather than just personal preferences. Whilst don't know if its true these days but certainly not that long ago some entry level models of premium brands were made by inferior brands and just rebadged so an entry level sony could be a mid level sharp with a different badge and 20% price uplift.

What tv model did you have? What TV model are they offering? 

As to cash -v- vouchers... insurers get significant discounts by leveraging their buying power with preferred suppliers. These days the Financial Ombudsman supports the idea that a cash settlement can represent what the vouchers would have cost the insurer as long as the preferred supplier can provide an appropriate replacement.

TSx

Whilst not usually stated in the policy, based on previous complaints I've seen, it is likely that the Financial Ombudsman would need want to see some equivalence in brands but not identical.

e.g providing all the functionality is the same, a Samsung and a Toshiba could be considered similar enough quality wise - it would probably be unreasonable though for the insurer to base the settlement for your named brand TV on a supermarket own brand.

GeordieGeorge

How old is your television? There’s a steady march of technological changes in televisions so it’s possible that after a couple of years the “equivalent” model is sold under another brand, and the flagship brand has moved on to the next big thing.

dunstonh

Technology moves on.   If you had an LG OLED, for example, they get updated each year.  If you broke a C9 you would not be paid the money to get a C14. Even though its the modern equivalent.      The problem with top end TVs, especially the likes of the LG Oled, is that there are not many equivalents available.   Although you can often pick up the previous years model at a decent discount.   If yours isn't an Oled then you shouldn't have much difficulty picking up an alternative that is broadly similar.  Maybe add a bit of personal money and get the upgrade.

Jumblebumble

Deleted_User said:

It's legal to offer a higher value for vouchers as it costs them less, so you get a higher payout.

Unless you can demonstrate that the brand creates a clear difference in spec, the offer is perfectly valid and ethical. And certainly not a 'scam'!

Would you be minded to argue that supplying a Beko to replace a Miele washing machine would be acceptable assuming the specs were identical ?

[Deleted User]

delete 123

U

























































































































































































































































































delete 123