Need your help with regards to my Insurance

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:26

I currently in contact with Admiral with regards to problem with my insurance policy.
I used to own an old Peugeot 106. It was covered by Admiral third party only.
I bought a brand new Seat Ibiza on the 29th of September. I amended my policy, rather than restarting a new policy. I've come across some problems

The easiest thing for me to do is probably to just copy the letters here.

Here goes:

Dear Sirs,

Re: Complaint about service:

I am writing to you having recently been in contact with your company to amend my policy to cover my brand new vehicle during which to say the least I have experienced some problems.

I have been dealing with a gentleman called *Name removed*.

On the 26th September I contacted you to advise that I was changing my vehicle on the 29th of September. I gave *Name removed* all of the details of the new car including its value. She alerted me that Admiral would only pay out the market value of the car, I agreed and told her that I had GAP insurance, so it wouldn’t be a problem.

Because it was a brand new car I requested that the policy document was sent directly to car dealer via recorded post, so that they could tax my vehicle.
The following morning I received my insurance certificate via special delivery. I checked with the car dealer to see if they had received anything, they replied no. So clearly someone had sent the document to me instead of the car dealer. I had to do a 70 mile round trip to travel to the dealership to deliver the certificate, and I had paid you £7.50 for the privilege!!

On the 29th of September I travelled to the car dealer to collect my car. I signed all the forms and then drove the car home, all was ok.
When I opened my post that night and read the documents I’d received, I was alarmed to see that I was only covered for Third party, even though I was covered fully comprehensively on the temporary certificate. So I’d driven my £11,000 car 35 miles with only third party cover.

I quickly picked up my phone and contacted you with regards to your mistake. Much to my amazement *Name removed* told me I would have to pay an additional fee of £450, to put the cover right and that you had sent the insurance certificate to the car dealer as requested, which you hadn’t as I received them at my home address the following morning.

I am therefore requesting that you fully investigate your error and would request that you honour the price I agreed with *Name removed* on the 26th of September, which was £130.62 per month until the 8th of March 2007. It cannot be denied that I wanted fully Comprehensive cover despite *Name removed* trying to state this, as the Temporary certificate confirms this. Your company has made an error and I would request that I am not the one who has to suffer because of your inefficiencies.

Yours faithfully

Thomas Harland

----------------------RESPONSE FROM ADMIRAL----------------------

Dear Mr Harland

Thank you for your email received on the 30th of October 2006. I am sorry you have been unhappy with our service recently. As a quality executive for Admiral, I have looked into your comments.

After reading your email, I would like to confirm the following. On 26th of September 2006 you called us to change you car. We then agreed to send a cover note to your home address, one cover note to the garage and faxed a cover note to Mr *Name Removed*. I understand the garage did no receive the cover notes and I'm happy to write off the charge of £7.50. I am sorry for an inconvenience this has caused.

I agree the temporary certificate we sent did state the car had comprehensive cover. This is because when the system issues a temporary cover notes the cover will automatically default to fully comprehensive cover. We then have to change the cover manually. We did not do this because of a human error. Cleary this is not acceptable and not the service we expect to provide to our customers. I will arrange further training to make sure this does not happen again.

After listening to your call with *Name removed*, I can confirm you did not ask to change your policy to comprehensive cover. We will not change the cover on a policy unless you ask us to. *Name removed* quoted you on a price based on third party cover only and the extra charge for changing the policy is correct.

I understand you may remain disappointed but I hope I have explained the reason for our actions. I am grateful for your comments and am sorry you feel our service did not meet the high standards we promise our customers.

----------------------END OF REPONSE----------------------

Where do I go from here? I feel like I'm being ripped off. I'm paying over £200 a month to insure my car because of a mistake they have made.

Thanks for reading, I hope you can help

Regards

Tom

[TW]Fox · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:29

Sounds like a mistake you made? They've listented to the recording and you didnt ask to change to comprehensive cover. Is this the case?

Scrutinize · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:33

[TW]Fox said:
Sounds like a mistake you made? They've listented to the recording and you didnt ask to change to comprehensive cover. Is this the case?

Or as you would expect they are covering their back. I would ask for a copy of the tape as you are entitled to.

Still leaves you in a dilema. Do some online quotes even with admiral. Cancel your policy if you can get refunded etc, go somewhere else.

Maz · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:33

Saying that, she told them that the car would be paid out to the market value of the vehicle in a write off - which 3rd party would not cover unless of course written off by someone else which is none of her concerns!

Also the fact that any vehicle above the value of £5k can not be insured 3rd party also should have been detected by the insurance company and advised to the customer.

[TW]Fox · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:37

Maz said:
Saying that, she told them that the car would be paid out to the market value of the vehicle in a write off - which 3rd party would not cover unless of course written off by someone else which is none of her concerns!

No, she told him that they would 'only pay out market value'. The car is, after all, covered for fire and theft...

Also the fact that any vehicle above the value of £5k can not be insured 3rd party also should have been detected by the insurance company and advised to the customer.

I always thought this was a policy issue with insurers rather than an actual law.

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:38

Maz said:
Saying that, she told them that the car would be paid out to the market value of the vehicle in a write off - which 3rd party would not cover unless of course written off by someone else which is none of her concerns!

Also the fact that any vehicle above the value of £5k can not be insured 3rd party also should have been detected by the insurance company and advised to the customer.

I always thought a car valued over £5000 couldn't be insured under third-party insurance. But I wasn't sure whether it was true.

I think they're in the wrong. Where do I go next? Should I get in touch with an
insurance ombudsman?

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:39

[TW]Fox said:
No, she told him that they would 'only pay out market value'. The car is, after all, covered for fire and theft...

My previous car wasn't even covered for fire and theft, only third-party.

Maz · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:44

Tdh1987 said:
I always thought a car valued over £5000 couldn't be insured under third-party insurance. But I wasn't sure whether it was true.

I think they're in the wrong. Where do I go next? Should I get in touch with an
insurance ombudsman?

Next step would be to get back in touch with the insurance company stating what you want to settle the dispute, tell them that you will be contacting an ombudsman if the despute can not be settled.

Basically you want to pay what you were originally quoted, if they don't agree then contact insurance ombudsman who will help from there.

AFAIK there is compensation available for upto £2K.

Maz · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:46

[TW]Fox said:
No, she told him that they would 'only pay out market value'. The car is, after all, covered for fire and theft...

I always thought this was a policy issue with insurers rather than an actual law.

3rd party only, even if it is a issue with insurers they still failed to mention this - which given what the OP is saying probably means he did ask for FC insurance so there was no need to mention this.

[TW]Fox · 16 Nov 2006 at 13:53

So you are saying the insurer is lying to him? How odd, they claim to have recorded evidence he never asked for comprehensive cover - to me this would suggest they are right. I see no reason why a company like this would stoop to fraud to cover what, if it was an error, would have been a minor error.

Why would they lie and pretend they have a recording when they dont, or that the record says something it doesnt?

kaiowas · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:02

[TW]Fox said:
Sounds like a mistake you made? They've listented to the recording and you didnt ask to change to comprehensive cover. Is this the case?

I'm usually very wary of insurance companies but you've still not answered this question. Did you actually ask them to change your policy to fully comp? If not then you can have no complaint.

How much extra did you agree to pay when switching from the 106 to the Ibiza?

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:06

I don't remember whether or not I asked for FC insurance. Although I would have imagined it is obvious I would have wanted that, as the car is worth £10k.

The fact that they amended my cover note to display FC suggests to me I did so.

The price we agreed to pay after the change was £130/month now it is £200/month until March 2007.

[TW]Fox · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:14

Tdh1987 said:
I don't remember whether or not I asked for FC insurance. Although I would have imagined it is obvious I would have wanted that, as the car is worth £10k.

Given that you 'cannot remember', they have a recording proving you never asked, and you have a third party insurance policy, I would suggest you never asked for comprehensive insurance.

It might well be obvious, it might well have been silly for the insurer not to clarify the level of cover, but legally speaking they provided exactly what you asked for.

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:19

So are you suggesting I just leave it as it is and carry on paying £200/month?

Is it not worth trying?

kaiowas · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:19

Tdh1987 said:
The price we agreed to pay after the change was £130/month now it is £200/month until March 2007.

What were you paying before the change? Assuming the price didn't go up by much then there's no way you could have reasonably expected it to cover the change from 3rd party cover on an old car to FC on a brand spanker.

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:24

Before it was £82.30... Rising to £130.

[TW]Fox · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:30

Tdh1987 said:
So are you suggesting I just leave it as it is and carry on paying £200/month?

Is it not worth trying?

No harm in trying but remember it is your mistake and so if you get anywhere you should be thankful

Third Opinion · 16 Nov 2006 at 14:41

I thought it was difficult to get TPFT on vehicles above 5k they usually question it.

Vertigo · 16 Nov 2006 at 18:27

Tdh1987 said:
Before it was £82.30... Rising to £130.

So you planned to change from third party only cover on an "old Peugeot 106" to fully comp on a brand new £10k car and the monthly payment increased by less than £50.

That seems ridiculously cheap to me, didn't this set alarm bells ringing at the time?

Tdh1987 · 16 Nov 2006 at 18:47

No since other quotes I got from other insurance companys were around that figure.