Tesco Insurance - claim problem

JDE001

Over Xmas I discovered that cream carpets and Lucozade don't really mix. Rang Tesco Insurance today and explained the situation. It transpires that they're only going to pay for half of the carpet as we have a lounge/diner and there are French Doors between the 2 rooms. I explained to the humourless robot I spoke to that its one continuous piece of carpet, no runners etc and to keep it looking as it does now the whole carpet will need replacing.

The alternative is to have a runner and 2 carpets that are going to be different shades. She wasn't interested at all and referred me to my policy booklet. I asked whether removing the doors, thus removing said 'physical barrier' would be acceptable. Apparently not.

By the time I've paid the £125 excess and the other half of the carpet its not going to be worth my while claiming (factoring in future premium rises etc), although I guess thats the point. Feeling well and truly stitched up. :mad:

missile

I guess it is only when you make a claim that you find out how good the insurance company is?

lisyloo

Make a formal complaint.

You are dealing with someone on the phone that hasn't seen your house.
I don't think their response is adequate.
Complaints often go to a different department, so it's definitely worth a go.

FlameCloud

Tescos are wrong, pure and simple.

If it is one continuous piece of carpet then it is one item. They cannot force you to have runners in it and if you can see the carpet through the door then this just reinforces it.

jessjess_2

Unfortunatly Tesco are correct. Their policies come with matching item exclusions, which i simple terms state that if an item forms part of a set, ie a 3 piece suite, or in your cause forms part of a continuous carpet, them only the damaged area/item has to be replaced. Every household insurer has this exclusions, wheter they enforce it is another matter, but as the other room's carpet is not damaged then they have no legal obligation to replace it, the ABI and FOS will unfortunatly side with your insurer if it goes to a FOS complaint.

FYI complaints are dealt with in house, unless they are FOS complaints, no seperate department for complaints, just dealt with by managers.

FlameCloud

That is wrong, unfortunatly.

Tesco CANNOT rely on the matching of items clause in this case. The carpet is a single item, the fact that it covers two rooms is irrelevent.

Their items clause actually states

But not for the cost of replacing or repair to any undamaged items solely because they form part of a set, suite, group or collection of items of a uniform design, nature or colour

A continuous carpet is neither of those 4 things. If the OP pushes it all the way to an FOS complaint they will order the insurer to pay simply because if the carpet is not pyshically divided into rooms then it is impossible to replace the carpet without damaging the rest of the carpet permanently.

FYI complaints, under FOS rules have to be dealt with by a different department. Complaints to a manager in the claims department are not treated as such.

FYI, you may also want to read up on how 'matching of items' clauses are dealt with by the FOS.

JDE001

Thanks for the replies folks. Apparently someone from another department will be contacting me within 5 working days to discuss the claim in more detail. I'll be pushing this as far as I can, after all I have nothing to lose! :beer:

FlameCloud

5 working days is the complaints timescales- intitial response within 5 days and a full response in 8 weeks.

If you push this all the way the FOS will make them pay, but it probably wont get that far. Just dont let them tell you that it is matching of items clause!

Oscar_The_Grouch

OK. There are 2 major points here:

1. There is a general acceptance by the FOS that unless a policy states otherwise, cover for "matching areas and sets" is expected to be around 50% of the cost of the undamaged part.

2. If a policy is providing non-standard cover, you have to be informed of this before you take the policy out.

Covering part 2 first, Norwich Union provide at least 50% cover. If you want proof, download a copy of any of the policy wordings for Saga Home Insurance; it's underwritten by NU under the guise of London and Edinburgh who they own. On that basis, you can argue that Direct Line missold you the policy and failed to comply with their requirements. Ask them if they would like you to take that up with the FSA!!

Going to point 1, you can argue that the FOS ruled that 50% was the starting point if there was a break in the carpet (it was in their newsletter - go to the FOS website and search on "matching sets"). In your case, there is no break in the carpet and the doors are decorative only - If you had fitted saloon style doors, would they still be arguing? Push for the complete amount.

If they still refuse to settle, tell them that you intend to take the matter to the FOS and say "please send me a final decision letter". The FOS will not consider your case until you have received this and it binds the insurance company to the decision of the Ombudsman (they also have to pay a £400 fee to the FOS for each case that goes that far).

Just remain calm throughout and remember 2 key points:

1. You are probably smarter than the person on the other end of the phone
2. but they are only doing their job.

Have fun!!

Oscar_The_Grouch

Sorry, regarding my post above, should have said that Direct Line own UK Insurance who provide the Tesco cover!!

gazza975526570

Oscar_The_Grouch wrote: »

Sorry, regarding my post above, should have said that Direct Line own UK Insurance who provide the Tesco cover!!

No they dont.

RBS Insurance own Direct Line.

Tesco insurance is a joint venture with RBS and Tesco