£35k Car Stolen, what happened to me thereafter
Discussion
I had a Ferrari stolen from my home and from the start of the claims process I was treated with suspicion and thoroughly messed about. It started with the 'telephone interview' on the day of the claim. I remember this taking over two hours and being incredibly frustrating. I was initially told it would take up to 30 minutes. It included having to give a verbal description of the layout of my property to a complete stranger who wouldn't accept a pdf floorplan. Try it. The description included gems like how many windows I had, which way they opened and the view from them. Yes, wtf?
But that was only the start, the same questions were asked again and again over an eight week period (I should add that the Police were involved, the car recovered, albeit wrecked after blocking a main road for an hour, and had arrested a suspect at the scene). One telepbone interview after another interspersed with having to complete a conventional claims form.
Absolutely anything was used to try and delay settling the claim. When it got to the stage where I finally ran out of patience they produced another tactic which was to ask for the spare key. When I asked why they needed it after eight weeks (the car was destroyed) they wouldn't say, only that it was highly relevant to the claim. At this I took fright at the idea of sending it, fully expecting them to deny receipt and use that against me in some way, so I drove several hundred miles to deliver it to their offices.
It transpired I had two spares and this produced much hand wringing as I had apparently told them I had one spare when I took out the policy. I could never work out what their angle was beyond avoiding the claim but I was even able to get the Police to intercede on my behalf without getting anywhere. Just more excuses and questions. For the avoidance of doubt, lest anyone should be thinking this was some scally on a s
te estate trying his hand at ringing, I really am a company director and I do live in a fk off house in a fk off area. The Police discovered the nicked car before I realised it was missing and had time to report it!
It was also at this time that I learned of the need to read policy documents in fine detail, several times over. One of the questions that kept coming back was whether the car was stored roof up when it was stolen, whether I could prove it, etc. Turned out there was a clause in the policy that said the roof had to be up whenever the car wasn't being driven, even at home. Check your policies convertible owners! Mine was stored roof up when at home and when it was stolen, but to be honest, only because of a fear of mice getting at the interior when it was in the garage.
The final drama surounded the payout amount. I wanted market value, which was what the policy stated. They wanted to pay close to what I had paid for the car. I explained I could have bought the car for a tenner from a distresed seller and that would have nothing to do with the market value, which iirc was now about £10k more than I had paid for the car. This was obviously an alien concept to them, cars only go down in value in their world.
It took an intervention at Director level to finally sort it out but it was an experience I would not like to repeat. During the claim my late father asked a question that stuck: "how long did it take for them to relieve you of the premium and how long has it taken for you to get paid?" The best bit is that I have in the past worked as the claims training manager (motor and personal lines) for a major UK insurer and that company would never have behaved in the way I was treated.
You can probably tell that it still annoys me to this day. I now triple check everything with my insurers and insist that every phone communication is backed up in writing.
But that was only the start, the same questions were asked again and again over an eight week period (I should add that the Police were involved, the car recovered, albeit wrecked after blocking a main road for an hour, and had arrested a suspect at the scene). One telepbone interview after another interspersed with having to complete a conventional claims form.
Absolutely anything was used to try and delay settling the claim. When it got to the stage where I finally ran out of patience they produced another tactic which was to ask for the spare key. When I asked why they needed it after eight weeks (the car was destroyed) they wouldn't say, only that it was highly relevant to the claim. At this I took fright at the idea of sending it, fully expecting them to deny receipt and use that against me in some way, so I drove several hundred miles to deliver it to their offices.
It transpired I had two spares and this produced much hand wringing as I had apparently told them I had one spare when I took out the policy. I could never work out what their angle was beyond avoiding the claim but I was even able to get the Police to intercede on my behalf without getting anywhere. Just more excuses and questions. For the avoidance of doubt, lest anyone should be thinking this was some scally on a s
te estate trying his hand at ringing, I really am a company director and I do live in a fk off house in a fk off area. The Police discovered the nicked car before I realised it was missing and had time to report it!It was also at this time that I learned of the need to read policy documents in fine detail, several times over. One of the questions that kept coming back was whether the car was stored roof up when it was stolen, whether I could prove it, etc. Turned out there was a clause in the policy that said the roof had to be up whenever the car wasn't being driven, even at home. Check your policies convertible owners! Mine was stored roof up when at home and when it was stolen, but to be honest, only because of a fear of mice getting at the interior when it was in the garage.
The final drama surounded the payout amount. I wanted market value, which was what the policy stated. They wanted to pay close to what I had paid for the car. I explained I could have bought the car for a tenner from a distresed seller and that would have nothing to do with the market value, which iirc was now about £10k more than I had paid for the car. This was obviously an alien concept to them, cars only go down in value in their world.
It took an intervention at Director level to finally sort it out but it was an experience I would not like to repeat. During the claim my late father asked a question that stuck: "how long did it take for them to relieve you of the premium and how long has it taken for you to get paid?" The best bit is that I have in the past worked as the claims training manager (motor and personal lines) for a major UK insurer and that company would never have behaved in the way I was treated.
You can probably tell that it still annoys me to this day. I now triple check everything with my insurers and insist that every phone communication is backed up in writing.
Agrilla said:
Financial Ombudsman Service
This is why I have such a policy for all of my cars. FOS said:
Assessing the value of a used vehicle is not an exact science – though we take all relevant evidence into account to make sure we are as consistent as possible:
- . We pay most attention to valuations given in motor-trade guides, such as Parkers’, Glass’s and CAP. These are based on extensive nationwide research of actual selling prices (rather than just advertised prices).
- . Evidence from an independent engineer can be helpful, if available – particularly where the vehicle is not a standard one (for example, because it has been heavily modified).
- . We do not usually find advertisements for similar vehicles very persuasive. A vehicle may often be sold for less than the advertised price – and differences in mileage, year of registration, model type etc can significantly affect the value.
I think the joke is that you are made to jump through hoops to use a service that you have paid a lot for. I think of insurance as a an expensive piece of paperwork that is needed to show the police in case of an accident or just a general stop.
I would be very surprised if they paid anything out and I fully expect the same for my pension
I would be very surprised if they paid anything out and I fully expect the same for my pension
Agrilla has posted the FOS link I was referring too.
The other important bit to note from the FOS link is:
"In most cases, we assess the market value as the retail price which the consumer would have had to pay for a comparable vehicle at a reputable dealer, immediately before the date of the damage or theft."
So don't accept trade or even private sale values, if your insurer attempts to fob you off, send them that link.
The other important bit to note from the FOS link is:
"In most cases, we assess the market value as the retail price which the consumer would have had to pay for a comparable vehicle at a reputable dealer, immediately before the date of the damage or theft."
So don't accept trade or even private sale values, if your insurer attempts to fob you off, send them that link.
I had a similar experience a few years back, when my car was written off whilst parked.
The third party fessed up, the third party insurers accepted liability and all seemed straightforward.
Except that the insurance companies insisted that I claim through my own insurers who would then recover costs from the third party insurers. OK, fair enough.
Except that I was insured with Admiral, who proceeded to massively undervalue my car and dick me about generally. The upshot was that the third party insurer wouldn't pay out until I'd agreed a value with my own insurer and Admiral wouldn't budge.
In the end, I took both insurers to the Small Claims Court as co-defendants (car value was under £10k). Although it didn't actually make it to court as the third party insurer sent me a cheque for the full value on the day the summons landed on their mat.
I never expected to have to take my insurers to court over a non fault claim. It's not like they were even paying for it.
Overall, Admiral spent more time trying to stitch me up than they did trying to recover from the guilty party. They were universally awful to deal with in every way throughout the whole sorry saga.
The third party fessed up, the third party insurers accepted liability and all seemed straightforward.
Except that the insurance companies insisted that I claim through my own insurers who would then recover costs from the third party insurers. OK, fair enough.
Except that I was insured with Admiral, who proceeded to massively undervalue my car and dick me about generally. The upshot was that the third party insurer wouldn't pay out until I'd agreed a value with my own insurer and Admiral wouldn't budge.
In the end, I took both insurers to the Small Claims Court as co-defendants (car value was under £10k). Although it didn't actually make it to court as the third party insurer sent me a cheque for the full value on the day the summons landed on their mat.
I never expected to have to take my insurers to court over a non fault claim. It's not like they were even paying for it.
Overall, Admiral spent more time trying to stitch me up than they did trying to recover from the guilty party. They were universally awful to deal with in every way throughout the whole sorry saga.
croyde said:
I think the joke is that you are made to jump through hoops to use a service that you have paid a lot for. I think of insurance as a an expensive piece of paperwork that is needed to show the police in case of an accident or just a general stop.
I would be very surprised if they paid anything out and I fully expect the same for my pension
Do you insure your cars for Comprehensive? if so why don't you go Third Party Only? it would save you a lot of money.I would be very surprised if they paid anything out and I fully expect the same for my pension
I do. 2 cars and a bike. I go for the cheapest possible and opt for the highest excess as I have no intention, unless someone is trying to claim off of me, of using the service if I can help it.
Actually one of the cars is fully comp as it was the cheapest quote by far. £100 less than the nearest TPFT quote and it's with a known company. Weird!!
The motorbike is strange as I can never find anyone to quote Third Party only for low money. They still load me for being in London but if I can't claim for theft, why worry?
Actually one of the cars is fully comp as it was the cheapest quote by far. £100 less than the nearest TPFT quote and it's with a known company. Weird!!
The motorbike is strange as I can never find anyone to quote Third Party only for low money. They still load me for being in London but if I can't claim for theft, why worry?
Edited by croyde on Sunday 19th October 10:51
oscarwilde said:
I had a Ferrari stolen from my home and from the start of the claims process I was treated with suspicion and thoroughly messed about. It started with the 'telephone interview' on the day of the claim. I remember this taking over two hours and being incredibly frustrating. I was initially told it would take up to 30 minutes. It included having to give a verbal description of the layout of my property to a complete stranger who wouldn't accept a pdf floorplan. Try it. The description included gems like how many windows I had, which way they opened and the view from them. Yes, wtf?
But that was only the start, the same questions were asked again and again over an eight week period (I should add that the Police were involved, the car recovered, albeit wrecked after blocking a main road for an hour, and had arrested a suspect at the scene). One telepbone interview after another interspersed with having to complete a conventional claims form.
Absolutely anything was used to try and delay settling the claim. When it got to the stage where I finally ran out of patience they produced another tactic which was to ask for the spare key. When I asked why they needed it after eight weeks (the car was destroyed) they wouldn't say, only that it was highly relevant to the claim. At this I took fright at the idea of sending it, fully expecting them to deny receipt and use that against me in some way, so I drove several hundred miles to deliver it to their offices.
It transpired I had two spares and this produced much hand wringing as I had apparently told them I had one spare when I took out the policy. I could never work out what their angle was beyond avoiding the claim but I was even able to get the Police to intercede on my behalf without getting anywhere. Just more excuses and questions. For the avoidance of doubt, lest anyone should be thinking this was some scally on a ste estate trying his hand at ringing, I really am a company director and I do live in a fk off house in a fk off area. The Police discovered the nicked car before I realised it was missing and had time to report it!
It was also at this time that I learned of the need to read policy documents in fine detail, several times over. One of the questions that kept coming back was whether the car was stored roof up when it was stolen, whether I could prove it, etc. Turned out there was a clause in the policy that said the roof had to be up whenever the car wasn't being driven, even at home. Check your policies convertible owners! Mine was stored roof up when at home and when it was stolen, but to be honest, only because of a fear of mice getting at the interior when it was in the garage.
The final drama surounded the payout amount. I wanted market value, which was what the policy stated. They wanted to pay close to what I had paid for the car. I explained I could have bought the car for a tenner from a distresed seller and that would have nothing to do with the market value, which iirc was now about £10k more than I had paid for the car. This was obviously an alien concept to them, cars only go down in value in their world.
It took an intervention at Director level to finally sort it out but it was an experience I would not like to repeat. During the claim my late father asked a question that stuck: "how long did it take for them to relieve you of the premium and how long has it taken for you to get paid?" The best bit is that I have in the past worked as the claims training manager (motor and personal lines) for a major UK insurer and that company would never have behaved in the way I was treated.
You can probably tell that it still annoys me to this day. I now triple check everything with my insurers and insist that every phone communication is backed up in writing.
All Insurers treat theft claims with suspicion as they're the type of claim that is subject to a lot of fraud, if you factor in a very expensive car they will take more time to investigate to satisfy themselves the claim is valid.But that was only the start, the same questions were asked again and again over an eight week period (I should add that the Police were involved, the car recovered, albeit wrecked after blocking a main road for an hour, and had arrested a suspect at the scene). One telepbone interview after another interspersed with having to complete a conventional claims form.
Absolutely anything was used to try and delay settling the claim. When it got to the stage where I finally ran out of patience they produced another tactic which was to ask for the spare key. When I asked why they needed it after eight weeks (the car was destroyed) they wouldn't say, only that it was highly relevant to the claim. At this I took fright at the idea of sending it, fully expecting them to deny receipt and use that against me in some way, so I drove several hundred miles to deliver it to their offices.
It transpired I had two spares and this produced much hand wringing as I had apparently told them I had one spare when I took out the policy. I could never work out what their angle was beyond avoiding the claim but I was even able to get the Police to intercede on my behalf without getting anywhere. Just more excuses and questions. For the avoidance of doubt, lest anyone should be thinking this was some scally on a s
te estate trying his hand at ringing, I really am a company director and I do live in a fk off house in a fk off area. The Police discovered the nicked car before I realised it was missing and had time to report it!It was also at this time that I learned of the need to read policy documents in fine detail, several times over. One of the questions that kept coming back was whether the car was stored roof up when it was stolen, whether I could prove it, etc. Turned out there was a clause in the policy that said the roof had to be up whenever the car wasn't being driven, even at home. Check your policies convertible owners! Mine was stored roof up when at home and when it was stolen, but to be honest, only because of a fear of mice getting at the interior when it was in the garage.
The final drama surounded the payout amount. I wanted market value, which was what the policy stated. They wanted to pay close to what I had paid for the car. I explained I could have bought the car for a tenner from a distresed seller and that would have nothing to do with the market value, which iirc was now about £10k more than I had paid for the car. This was obviously an alien concept to them, cars only go down in value in their world.
It took an intervention at Director level to finally sort it out but it was an experience I would not like to repeat. During the claim my late father asked a question that stuck: "how long did it take for them to relieve you of the premium and how long has it taken for you to get paid?" The best bit is that I have in the past worked as the claims training manager (motor and personal lines) for a major UK insurer and that company would never have behaved in the way I was treated.
You can probably tell that it still annoys me to this day. I now triple check everything with my insurers and insist that every phone communication is backed up in writing.
The type of interview you received was a "Cognitive Interview" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_interview which is similar to the type of interview the police tend to use. The basic idea is that a liar will have made up a basic story and thought of a back story to cover it. The very detailed questioning on basic items such as your windows is for the interviewer to gauge how you answer truthfully to these. They ask you to describe what happened and will then get you to repeat the story but with more detailed questions as a liar will often change the story slightly. You will then be asked seemingly unrelevant questions such as what were you watching on tv or were you wearing etc as a liar will often not have thought up answers to these. The whole story will be gone over again once or twice.
It's a fairly effective technique as the interviewers are very highly trained and they can use this to help confirm the story is true. Unfortunately it can be discomforting to the client as it goes on for so long and makes them feel guilty.
Insurers ask for the spare keys as a fraudulent claim often uses the spare key, also most Insurers exclude theft if the key is left in or on the car so ensuring you have all copies of the keys confirms the keys were not in or on the car. In addition on the type of car you have, if there's any query about the claim the key often holds data about when it was last used this can help confirm your story or if it was a fraudulent claim disprove your story.
Obviously if your car is being written off they will be looking to sell the salvage for as much as possible and having the spare key can add to the value.
The requirement for a convertible to have the roof up when at home is fairly common.
I had a similar situation on value of a Ferrari convertible for a client who was a motortrader, he bought the car in winter to drive as around as his personal car until summer when he intended selling it at a profit. A Ferrari garage managed to write the car off on a "Test drive" by spinning it 720 and ending up in a field. He had a similar problem initially with the garage's Insurers as they wanted to pay the value he paid when it was worth summer prices when it was written off. I got him the correct value after a week of arguements
I would recommend you look at Insuring with Chubb who are arguably the best Motor Insurer and frequently win best Insurer by voting from brokers. They offer a fleet policy which includes driving other cars for comprehensive cover for all of your named family members and they agree a value with you for each car at the start of each year. You need to insure your house with them to be able to qualify for car insurance. They're not a cheap Insurer as they aim at the very top of the market and will only cover affluent customers. Their cover is much wider than a normal policy and for a home claim they normally visit you the next day, agree a value with you there and then to replace the item at the supplier you normally use eg if you bought it from Harrods they will pay you the Harrods price. They then transfer the money into your account the next day. As I said it's normally not that cheap but the type of customers they deal with are happy to pay extra for the convenience of dealing with an Insurer who offers the sort of service they expect.
I have no connection with Chubb apart from placing business with them, you can also find a similar service from Hiscox.
Having said that the service you received was not good.
V8LM said:
This is why I have such a policy for all of my cars.
A serious question. Which insurance company are you insured with? Reason is, I couldn't find one that would insure my modern cars at an agreed value. They were fine with the classics, but not with the later cars.To the Ferrari owner - which insurance company did you use? I want to steer clear of them for starters....
Chubb and Hiscox. Both good names in the general insurance market. I'll give them both a go at next renewal. Especially if they'll agree a value on any car, regardless of ago. Useful post from Dacouch too. Thanks.
Interesting to see Admiral up there with Direct Line as one to avoid. You'd expect those high street names to care about their reputation wouldn't you?
Interesting to see Admiral up there with Direct Line as one to avoid. You'd expect those high street names to care about their reputation wouldn't you?
ZOLLAR said:
dacouch said:
Hopefully you read your claims files more thoroughly than you've read this thread.
Incidently the poster you're replying to is almost certainly referring to a cognitive interview which I'm pretty sure Admiral would use
I'm merely pointing out that lie detectors aren't used as they would need to be discloses before use however I'm not divulging what questioning techniques we use.Incidently the poster you're replying to is almost certainly referring to a cognitive interview which I'm pretty sure Admiral would use
Customer:- "No definitely not..how dare you!"
A:- "Are you sure"
Customer:- "Look, I've told you once, i'll not tell you again"
A:- "Are you REALLY REALLY sure"
Customer:- Right, I've had enough, I'm going to get my dad on you"
A:- "Errr, OK then, cheque will be in the post tomorrow"
As a slight aside, if you have comprehensive insurance as well as RTI GAP, and your vehicle is either a total loss or is stolen and not recovered, does your GAP Policy provider expect you to argue with your insurer on the valuation?
Or could you be put in a situation whereby you accept the offer from your comprehensive insurer, you then claim on your GAP policy and get told you should have argued for more?
Or could you be put in a situation whereby you accept the offer from your comprehensive insurer, you then claim on your GAP policy and get told you should have argued for more?
rubystone said:
V8LM said:
This is why I have such a policy for all of my cars.
A serious question. Which insurance company are you insured with? Reason is, I couldn't find one that would insure my modern cars at an agreed value. They were fine with the classics, but not with the later cars.To the Ferrari owner - which insurance company did you use? I want to steer clear of them for starters....
rubystone said:
Chubb and Hiscox. Both good names in the general insurance market. I'll give them both a go at next renewal. Especially if they'll agree a value on any car, regardless of ago. Useful post from Dacouch too. Thanks.
Interesting to see Admiral up there with Direct Line as one to avoid. You'd expect those high street names to care about their reputation wouldn't you?
Here are the Chubb Motor benefits, I forgot to mention a like for like courtesy car (Not a credit hire) and you choose the repairer.Interesting to see Admiral up there with Direct Line as one to avoid. You'd expect those high street names to care about their reputation wouldn't you?
http://www.chubb.com/international/uk/cpi/chubb105...
They won't be cheap although they do take into account that the more cars you have the less each vehicle will be driven when working out the prices.
Admiral are a fairly unique Insurer, they're a relatively new Insurer who have started from scratch and cut out a lot of the expensive processes and parts of the cover. They make much higher percentages of profit compared to virtually any other car insurer. I class them as the Ryan Air/Easy Jet of the motor industry
Red Leader said:
croyde said:
I think the joke is that you are made to jump through hoops to use a service that you have paid a lot for. I think of insurance as a an expensive piece of paperwork that is needed to show the police in case of an accident or just a general stop.
I would be very surprised if they paid anything out and I fully expect the same for my pension
Do you insure your cars for Comprehensive? if so why don't you go Third Party Only? it would save you a lot of money.I would be very surprised if they paid anything out and I fully expect the same for my pension
Comprehensive with a f
k off sized excess is usually the cheapest way to get insured.Wacky Racer said:
Admiral:- "Are you putting in a spurious claim for this stolen car of yours?"
Customer:- "No definitely not..how dare you!"
A:- "Are you sure"
Customer:- "Look, I've told you once, i'll not tell you again"
A:- "Are you REALLY REALLY sure"
Customer:- Right, I've had enough, I'm going to get my dad on you"
A:- "Errr, OK then, cheque will be in the post tomorrow"
Very funny Customer:- "No definitely not..how dare you!"
A:- "Are you sure"
Customer:- "Look, I've told you once, i'll not tell you again"
A:- "Are you REALLY REALLY sure"
Customer:- Right, I've had enough, I'm going to get my dad on you"
A:- "Errr, OK then, cheque will be in the post tomorrow"
I'll try it tomorrow and report back..Had a similar experience with a stolen car. In my case it was stolen recovered but written off due to damage. Had a lie detector phone interview. I then waited 5 weeks while they messed about investigating. Eventually got pissed off and made a formal written complaint to the insurers pointing out they weren't in compliance with the FSA regulations. Which got an intimidate response and settlement offer. All this over a car which was worth £600. I reckon the claim cost me more in hassle than the car was worth.
DJP said:
I had a similar experience a few years back, when my car was written off whilst parked.
The third party fessed up, the third party insurers accepted liability and all seemed straightforward.
Except that the insurance companies insisted that I claim through my own insurers who would then recover costs from the third party insurers. OK, fair enough.
Except that I was insured with Admiral, who proceeded to massively undervalue my car and dick me about generally. The upshot was that the third party insurer wouldn't pay out until I'd agreed a value with my own insurer and Admiral wouldn't budge.
In the end, I took both insurers to the Small Claims Court as co-defendants (car value was under £10k). Although it didn't actually make it to court as the third party insurer sent me a cheque for the full value on the day the summons landed on their mat.
I never expected to have to take my insurers to court over a non fault claim. It's not like they were even paying for it.
Overall, Admiral spent more time trying to stitch me up than they did trying to recover from the guilty party. They were universally awful to deal with in every way throughout the whole sorry saga.
How do you go about taking an insurance company to court, that's the next process I want to take?The third party fessed up, the third party insurers accepted liability and all seemed straightforward.
Except that the insurance companies insisted that I claim through my own insurers who would then recover costs from the third party insurers. OK, fair enough.
Except that I was insured with Admiral, who proceeded to massively undervalue my car and dick me about generally. The upshot was that the third party insurer wouldn't pay out until I'd agreed a value with my own insurer and Admiral wouldn't budge.
In the end, I took both insurers to the Small Claims Court as co-defendants (car value was under £10k). Although it didn't actually make it to court as the third party insurer sent me a cheque for the full value on the day the summons landed on their mat.
I never expected to have to take my insurers to court over a non fault claim. It's not like they were even paying for it.
Overall, Admiral spent more time trying to stitch me up than they did trying to recover from the guilty party. They were universally awful to deal with in every way throughout the whole sorry saga.
Carl
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff