Dishonest Loss Assessor

Alex0857

I highly appreciate anyone's comments and advice. I am currently using a loss assessor for my subsidence claim with 10% fee agreed. Instead of claiming for cash settlement for me the loss assessor tells the insurer that they will do the repair job, without asking for my consent. I have been asking the loss assessor to show me the proposal from the insurer but they refuse. They keep telling me verbally that insurer will normally do a poor repair and they instead will do very good repair for my house and I don't have to pay them any fees if I choose them to repair. They avoid my questions of the difference between their proposal and the insurer's proposal.  I understand that the insurer's loss adjuster's job is to save money for the insurer so they tend to ask their contractor to do just the decoration jobs. However insurers are obliged by law to do a proper repair job and provide a guarantee. If I go with my loss assessor's repair then there is no guarantee of what they do, especially I find that they have not been very honest with me and not passing all the information from the insurer to me. I am willing to pay a loss assessor to look after my best interest but it looks like they are taking advantage from my tragedy to maximise their own profits. Although I have heard many people saying how happy they are with their loss assessors repairing their flooded home for them saving them time and hassle, I suppose that's the difference between flooding and subsidence cases, or I just happen to be the very unfortunate one? What shall I do now? Thank you for your time.

pramsay13

Was the loss adjuster instructed by your insurance company?
The loss adjuster doesn't normally undertake work but instead organises it but I'm a bit confused as you seem to have offer of work from your insurance company and offer of work from your loss adjuster.

Anyway if you are not happy speak to your insurance company as they are the ones you have a contract with. 

cajef

pramsay13 said:

Was the loss adjuster instructed by your insurance company?

The OP is talking about a loss assessor someone they have employed, not a loss adjuster instructed by their insurance company.

eddddy

As you're finding, some Loss Assessors have a business model that works like this...

• The loss assessor has 'business relationships' with some contractors.
• The loss assessor recommends (or requires) that you use one of those contractors for repairs
• The contractor pays the loss assessor a fee for any jobs the loss assessor refers to them
• So you don't have to pay the loss assessor anything 

I guess you need to read the contract you have with the loss assessor, to see what you have agreed to. e.g. Whether you are bound to use the loss assessor's contractor, or whether you can use your own. Whether the loss assessor's contractors provide guarantees etc.

Taking a step back... what is the cause of the subsidence?

I can't see a good reason why your Loss Assessor is refusing to let you see the insurer's experts' reports, and the Loss Assessor's experts' reports.

Alex0857

eddddy said:

As you're finding, some Loss Assessors have a business model that works like this...

• The loss assessor has 'business relationships' with some contractors.
• The loss assessor recommends (or requires) that you use one of those contractors for repairs
• The contractor pays the loss assessor a fee for any jobs the loss assessor refers to them
• So you don't have to pay the loss assessor anything 

I guess you need to read the contract you have with the loss assessor, to see what you have agreed to. e.g. Whether you are bound to use the loss assessor's contractor, or whether you can use your own. Whether the loss assessor's contractors provide guarantees etc.

Taking a step back... what is the cause of the subsidence?

I can't see a good reason why your Loss Assessor is refusing to let you see the insurer's experts' reports, and the Loss Assessor's experts' reports.

The contract with my loss assessor is 10% of the claim settlement or the minimum of £1200. The fees can be waived if I choose to use their contractor. The problem is their contractors don't give guarantee and my insurer will not continue to cover if I choose contractors other than appointed by insurer. The subsidence is caused by trees next door owned by top superstore. They did show me the expert technical reports for the cause of subsidence but refuse to show me the proposed repair options including the cash settlement from the insurer, because they don't want me to choose from the options. They only show me one option which benefits the most to themselves but the least to me as their client and property owner.

Annemos

"but refuse to show me the proposed repair options including the cash settlement from the insurer,"

(Sorry, I have not yet found out how I quote something!) 


Re the above, Alex0857

Doesn't the Insurance Company HAVE to give you this information? Wouldn't they be flouting some sort of Data Access Request type rules, if they don't? 

Surely you are entitled to see what the Insurance Company has proposed by way of repairs? And the Insurance Company should give it to you. 

Normally it could be in a Scope of Works, too, but you don't have one from the Insurance Company at the moment, as their Contractors are not currently in the loop. 

But there has to have been something like a Structural Engineering Report that was prepared for the Insurance Company with recommendations and they should give it to you. 

Sandtree

Annemos said:

Doesn't the Insurance Company HAVE to give you this information? Wouldn't they be flouting some sort of Data Access Request type rules, if they don't? 

Data Subject Access Request is a very particular thing, just because something would have to be disclosed under a DSAR doesn't mean it has to be shared as a run of the mill exercise.

The very concept of appointing a Loss Assessor is that you don't want to deal with it all yourself hence you are paying a third party to deal with it. As such they act as a filter, once the third party authorisation bit is dealt with, and so the insured wouldn't expect to receive the same level of detail any more.  That doesn't conclude them from a doing a GDPR DSAR but just changes the normal comms.