The Complaining Cow v Tesco #TescoFail!

Oi! Don’t just jump to the bottom to see if I won! There will be a test later you know to see if you read it all!

Let’s start the post with a great big sigh. *Sighs. Most people who ever shopped at Tesco will share my frustration. Actually I didn’t realise just how many until I took to Twitter and looked at the @UKTesco timeline!

Yet More Reasons to Avoid Tesco

Yet More Reasons to Avoid Tesco

Okay so where to start. Well, unless you are some rich person who doesn’t live on the same planet as the rest of us, (in which case thank you Mr Cameron and colleagues for taking the time out of working out how to cut even more payment to the most needy so that they can’t afford to live and therefore die and become less of a burden to the tax payer, (I mean that is the theory isn’t it?) to read my Blog) you will know that Tesco provide reward vouchers for spending in their shop. More if you use their credit card.  Every so often it is double up rewards time. Great. Nope. Why? Because most of these double up vouchers people tried to use on the TescoDirect website. Oh how efficient. Wrong again. Why? Because the website was utterly flawed.

So, I start my sorry tale back on the 20th November. The system said items were in stock, got to checkout they were not. I emailed and said this was failure of their site. I had cashed in vouchers that if not spent by the 13th December would be lost! I got the vouchers to buy something that once at the checkout (i.e. after you get your vouchers!) I couldn’t use! They would not refund if the items didn’t come back in stock. Personally I do not think that is fair do you?

So I spent them. Later I tried a million times (ok a slight exaggeration, maybe hundreds of thousands) to process my vouchers on £80 worth of items.  I got this message “Sorry, we cannot place your order at the moment. We’re trying to fix the problem as soon as possible. Please try again later.” So fed up was I that I telephoned. That’s how annoyed I was. I hate telephoning complaints! The automated answering message informed me that they had had problems on the site and they were resolved. They were not and as was quite clear from the @UKTesco Twitter timeline, remained. Whilst waiting to try again on the line the line was cut off. Now, I wasn’t even speaking so it wasn’t me being rude! So I emailed. I got a response to say that the technical team were looking into it. I emailed back saying still a problem and expected redress as the time spent on the matter amounted to more than any savings from using the vouchers.

I got an email back saying that I would receive a goodwill gesture. (I believe that many gestures followed and none of them were goodwill ones). Charlotte told me that if I couldn’t use the vouchers then pay and she would refund on receipt of the voucher codes. So I duly tried again leaving the system for 24 hours. This time it was a different error. It accepted some of the codes. So I just paid for the full amount and emailed Charlotte. This was now the 26th November.

Now Tesco had my money. Actually it had the £80 plus £40 of vouchers which doubled up were £80 and those couldn’t be used. So I told Charlotte this and of course Charlotte just responded saying okay just let her have the voucher codes. No, it went unanswered. I forwarded it 2 days later stating that I would go to Trading Standards for breach of the Consumer Act for unfair trading and the Sale of Goods Act 1994 as amended for not honouring a contract. So that obviously got an answer. Nope. Emailed the following day saying that papers were ready to go the Small Claims Court. So of course I got a response then when they knew what I was talking about? Nope.

So I wrote to the CEO. Now, if you’ve read my other post about Tesco then you will know that I knew I wouldn’t get a response. So I did actually start the email with “Obviously this is a pointless email because you have demonstrated incredible contempt for your customers and this attitude it would appear is reflected all the way down the store and I see in your profits. There is a slight chance that someone in the Executive Office might see this though and save me the time and trouble of going to Trading Standards and the Small Claims Court”. I know I advise not using sarcasm but some people just really seriously try my patience.

Obviously no response.  So I took to Twitter. @UKTesco offered to help. Great. Nope. As I have now learnt from chatting to many people who complain to @UKTesco you get standard responses, delay tactics and no actual resolution. (Mind you look at this lack of security for Tesco customers that the Tesco Twitter team revealed). To cut a long story short, @UKTesco said Charlotte was waiting for the voucher codes. Huh? Yes. It would appear that she didn’t think it appropriate to respond to 3 emails to her to ask me for them even if it was “again”. Look how many times I tweeted the same thing to @UKTesco as I bored many of my followers! At first I refused, demanding the courtesy of a response. That tweet went ignored. (All very rude and not the done thing on Twitter at the best of times never mind being the face of a large company). So I said I would do it their way and sent Charlotte the codes. So, of course, I did what they requested and I had a response. Nope.  I tweeted @UKTesco, I said hello I’ve done it. I rt’d their response that they would look into it the following day when they still hadn’t got back to me. I asked if they were ignoring me. I didn’t get a response so take that a yes then! The last tweet they sent me said they would get back to me. They didn’t.

So there was nothing left for it. The Small Claims Court. I love it, the time consuming bit is over and it takes very little time to fill out a form. £25.

Small Claims Court Confirmation

Small Claims Court Confirmation

So over Christmas I too ‘em to court. All online, easy peasey £25 . Their defence was, shall we say non existent? I quote “That the defendant has been unable to use the vouchers is neither accepted nor denied” Eh what? Even better “The Defendant has no knowledge of any problems with these vouchers, as long as the claimant was using the correct process..” Copies of 3 emails saying their were problems, automated error message on their site and  implementing an automated telephone message saying that there was a problem meant…?

So, a week before the 6th June they tried to negotiate. Obviously. They were gonna lose. I knew this. First off they didn’t even offer me the court fee! Asked for more got the court fee and a few quid extra and you know what? Sod ‘em, that’s what I thought! They know they will lose I know I will win, who else will take on these giants it’s up to me to show Tesco that the humble shopper will not be treated in this way. “See you in court” said me.

But I didn’t ‘cos they didn’t turn up. Well obviously it wasn’t worth their while, they knew they were going to lose. So suited and booted (well sandals actually the sun was shining) I sat before Judge Vokes. He told me that he couldn’t see how I was owed any more than the £80 and court fee. Uh oh, Uh oh Uh oh, panic panic I’m a gonna lose I thought! “They told me in writing that they would give me a goodwill gesture” I said. “Not legally binding” said Judge Vokes. Oh I was going off this guy. “Sale of Goods Act… Supply of Goods and Services Act….” said I. “”Technical babble about vouchers and stuff” said the judge. I was really going off this guy now. Hmmmm “I thought it was important that the single person should make a stand against a big company like Tesco and make people realise that they can stand up to organisations treating customers with contempt” I tried. The judge gave me a big big smile nodded and said “Well done”. I was warming to him now. I wish I had taken a photo. “Although the goodwill gesture is not legally binding I can deem Tesco as being unreasonable and therefore award you £80 refund, £11 for expenses, and £50 for time. Total of £166”. I seriously liked Judge Vokes big time now. I’d done it. I’d won.

Now, what i want to know is, will I get Clubcard points with that? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease let them not pay up in 14 days. I can send in the court baliffs to sieze goods to the value of £166…… I’ll be picking up all the offers to get my money’s worth ‘an all!

I wanted to ask the Judge if he thought Tesco should employ me to reduce their level of complaints and increase their sales but thought better of it, thanked him for him time and bought some chocolate from Sainsburys across the road from the court and not the Tesco Express next door!

In short. I won. Many many hours of time on the matter and 7 months after the event, was it worth it? I think it was the principle of the thing! Would you have done it? Would you have let Tesco get away with keeping your £80 or would you have taken them to court?

Posted in Complaints, Complaints gaining redress, General complaints | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 40 Comments

How to Ensure Banks Don’t Break the Misrepresentation Act 1967

When I went on holiday to The Philippines I used the brilliant Martin Lewis website to compare rates for money. The best deal was Nat West. So I bought the Pesos. When I went to take the money we hadn’t spent to be changed the assistant told me that they couldn’t exchange without charging commission. Really? Not what it says on the website. Tut tut that would be a break in the Misrepresentation Act 1967. (When you enter an agreement on the basis of a statement purporting to be a fact but which turns out to be untrue, you have the right to cancel the deal and get your money back if they act quickly, or to compensation). Nat West staff wouldn’t have it though. Nor when I went back again to see someone senior!

So, obviously I did not pay commission! I wrote. I pointed out the error of their ways. Namely that they stated no commission fees on the website and that I would be informing Martin Lewis so that they could take Nat West off the site. I expected redress for having to make another journey, parking costs, time wasted on this matter and the inconvenience.

Think that worried them! They wrote acknowledging the mistakes and asking me to ‘phone them to discuss the matter. I don’t do that. So I wrote again. I made it clear that I would not be wasting any more time discussing the matter all the details were in the letter and suggested they ensured that when I took the money back that staff were properly informed and that I received adequate redress.Using the little known Misrepresentation Act 1967

Nat West gave me £250. The amount I was exchanging was less than £100! However, the amount reflected their concerns about my informing Martin Lewis methinks!

Never ever just give in to bad service. If they say no commission for exchanging money ensure that they keep to the promise. They are breaking the Law if they don’t. It’s because people can’t be bothered to complain and take the time to write a letter that bad practice continues.

Customer Service 5 out of 10
Prize £250
Rating Offal

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How to Refuse Halifax’s (& more) Offer of Redress Without Losing the First Offer!

Halifax Halifax Halifax. I have a choice of 3 complaints to do here. Actually 4 if you count the one I did for a friend and got her £500. Now which one today? Toss of a coin (yes 3 times don’t try and get clever with me you know it aint gonna work). Let’s take the most recent one.

I changed my name. Yes ha ha ha ha haha to all those companies to whom I haven’t yet complained who think they have my name. You don’t and you don’t know to what I changed it ner ner ner ner ner! (Slightly unnecessarily childish particularly given that I have just tweeted “How childish can politicians get? Seriously. “I win I got my Royal Charter” “I win I got my Law” Grow up & do what’s best 4 ppl!” But hey ho moving on).

So, got the certificate, paid for legal copies as some financial institutions needed that and others were happy with copies. Sent off details to Halifax and asked a simple question about fees on their card. You’d think that would be quite simple wouldn’t you, well obviously not or I wouldn’t be writing about it would I?!

I got a letter back addressed using my former name, not enclosing my document and not answering the question, but enclosing a new direct debit form! Fail on 3 counts! Rude huh? Wonder what they’d be like on  Twitter Etiquette? So I complained. Obviously.

I got a letter back offering me £30. Now, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again if you don’t think that the amount reflects the inconvenience or time spent on the matter, particularly when they don’t apologise or explain the issues…. complain again. So I did. I was particularly pedantic actually.

I pointed out the following to Ms R:

She said Halifax disposed of the document because it was a copy. (Oh yes Dear Reader did I not mention that earlier? Halifax destroyed the legal copy that I PAID for!) It was not a photocopy. It was a “Certified legal copy of a Deed of Change of Name (Deed Poll)”. I expected to be reimbursed!

She requested that I send my deed poll to the same address as before. Given that this was the address at which I had my property destroyed I refused to do that again and enclosed another legal copy to her and trusted that she would at least not destroy it and return it!

I received no explanation why, when my property was destroyed, no-one wrote to me to ask for (actually another) the deed poll. Had I not complained I could have continued to wait for both my deed poll to be returned and to receive my new credit card!

She completely ignored by question about the Card and I asked for a third time and failed to explain or apologise for why I only received a direct debit form and covering letter which ignored the two out of three points of my letter. I found this extremely rude and unacceptable.

Now here’s the particularly pedantic part. I wrote “I quote from your letter “I can see that we’ve let you down with some of the points you’ve raised. However I hope I’ve explained that there are some instances where I believe our actions were necessary.” This would indicate that you believe, as you have written in the plural, that at least two of your actions were necessary and acceptable. Please explain which these actions are. Destroying property which does not belong to Halifax and I had to pay for, not writing to me regarding this, ignoring my query about the credit card and writing to me in my former name are my list of complaints (to which I have added today). I do not believe that any of these actions (or non action!) were necessary, some were just downright rude. Please do explain which two you deem as necessary as I am very interested and it is these that I shall highlight to the Financial Ombudsman in particular”.

I also expected more than the £30 offerred.

I got a response. In short, £12 reimbursement for the deed poll and £100 for the inconvenience.

So that was that. Nah, I’m pedantic remember. So although satisfied with the amount, I did need to write again and point out that I had requested the money be sent in a cheque and not put on the card which she didn’t do! So, as I had to write again I hoped that the following points would help her in the future.

Just a little bit....;)

Just a little bit….?

1)       The first page of her letter was a photocopy and not the original on letterheaded notepaper.
2)       Fifth bullet point, incorrect use of an apostrophe in the word “fees”
3)       “are charges” not “is charges” would be grammatically correct (as in my letter which you could have copied)
4)       “You have been advised there is…” No, I advised you on this point and the instances are plural and therefore “are” not “is” is appropriate.
5)       No new paragraph on what should have been the first new paragraph on the second page.
6)       “…should be made clear to your at the time” should have been “you” not “your”
7)       “Halifax so not apply any loading..” doesn’t make any sense, I assume that you mean “do”
8)       “…and enclosed your Deed…” “enclose” not “enclosed”

There were a few other things, (not least that she didn’t answer the point about which issue I complained about was necessary) but I won’t bore you now seeing you got this far! Well honestly, I do expect a letter from a bank to be written and checked! Yes, I could have saved my time but frankly, the poor quality letter writing annoyed me and anyway I was being helpful! Perhaps it helped in her future work. I freely give tips for companies  on how to avoid complaints!

So, share your experiences of the banking world. Which one is good which one is bad? I have found HSBC pretty good but last time I wrote to them customer service standards were going down and I had to write to the CEO. What do you think of your bank/building society/credit card companies?

Customer Service 6 out of 10
Prize £112
Rating Churning!

Posted in Complaints gaining redress | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

1 little Known Fact You Need to Know When Your Gas is Cut Off!

Cold innit? Even colder when you are without heating. Gas people ever cut you off without notice? Back in 2011……

there had been some gas works undertaken in our road for some weeks. Starting on the 14th December we were without gas for 3 days. It was extremely cold, around the time of the snow and we were given 2 small electric heaters, a further heater the next day and 2 electric hobs. In addition, it was only by chance that we were not without heat for longer. When we had been without gas for all of the 14th and it was about 5pm I went outside to ask the workmen when my gas supply would be back on. They told me that I should have gas and that when they had put the cameras down our house was showing as fine and being served from across the road (where pipes are not being replaced).

Guess what I did? I just put up with it, well there was nothing they could do was there? Yeah right! Obviously I did what I do best. I complained. Now, I know people who have said they have been without electricity or gas and they don’t know how to complain or what to say. What you do people is fight them with their own rules! Here, it’s the National Grid. The Gas Standards are here You study them, you pull out every one they have broken and you use it. It isn’t quick, it isn’t just “oi give me money for annoying me”. It does take research and time.

So, I said that as per GS13 of the NG Standards I was not provided with notification in advance of interruption of supply at least 5 days in advance. In fact I was not given any notification. Had I been, I would have been able to make alternative arrangements, including taking my two year old to a warm house and not wasting food I decided to add. Always give that extra bit of detail when appropriate. Payment for that is £20. That’s a given they have to give it to you.

Now, remember I said add a bit of detail? Here was a bit more. The heaters gave little heat compared to a normally fully centrally heated house I said and I was unable to cook the meat I had defrosted (so couldn’t refreeze) I said and indeed other meat in the fridge I said. I had a two year old which made the situation worse as it was imperative that he was kept warm I said. We had to have the heaters on full blast for the entire time we were without gas supply at obviously great cost to us I said. Electricity costing more than gas! I expected to be compensated for the 3 days we were without supply which I believed to be £30 plus £30 for each 24 hours without supply, plus the increased cost of running 3 electric heaters. (I said).

Got £140. (Under GS14 they have to respond within 10 days, sadly they did!) Spent most of the day at a lovely friend’s house two doors away anyway! We also sold the heaters… But anyone want some electric rings??? I made some friends couple of hundred recently from the National Grid using different Standards, such as GS2 for leaving their lawn wrecked. Still waiting for them to even share my Facebook page to their friends though! I know, rude huh? You’d think spending a couple of hourse getting them a couple of hundred quid would be worth a few minutes asking their mates to like my page wouldn’t you… John?!

I can do nice

I can do nice

At this point I would like to say I can be nice. I can, honestly. Take that smirk off your face right now. If I concentrate very very hard I can do it. I had been giving the workmen regular posts of tea throughout all the time they were near my house. Now, I can be quite mean, evidently (although I think complaining and asserting your rights isn’t strictly speaking mean) but sometimes it pays to be nice. Guess who got their gas supply fixed first, not the miserable sods next door who never made them a cuppa!

Customer Service 9 out of 10
Prize £140
Rating No bull!

Posted in Complaints gaining redress | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Great Insurance #Hoax

I am pleased to include this Guest Blog Post by Chris Hargreaves who can be found on Twitter @scotprovsaysno

It is a long post but it’s all relevant and there is some really important advice here. If you take out any insurance you should read! Please also share with friends and colleagues we need to get the message out to stop these big organisations taking our money!

We are told time and again to be proactive and to insure against all sorts of disasters from insuring our home, cars, pets to ourselves. The UK insurance industry along with banks tries to get us to buy a wide range of protection insurance from PPI to life, critical illness and income protection. As we know, especially the banks who sold PPI at record rates sticking in on loans and products even without the customer knowing which led to the PPI scandal which is costing the industry billions of pounds a year.

So has the industry learnt a valuable lesson? NO it has not.

The industry says their biggest problem in getting people to take out protection insurance is cost but when you talk to the public their number one concern is trust. “What’s the point of paying for these policies? These policies never pay out anyway”. To be fair the pay outs on protection policies has risen from the 80%s mark to around 90% with Friendly Insurers paying out around the 98% mark with £6million a day paid out in claims. Here’s the sceptic in me… If you have 100,000 claims that means 10,000 people can be faced with a refused claim and if the industry never tells you how much in premiums it’s taking on a daily basis how can you come to a fair conclusion? So what happens when you take out a policy in good faith and your claim is refused? This:

In 2009 I was hospitalised with severe internal bleeding and a HB of 5 where I spent the next three months in three hospitals being treated like a lab rat. To cut a very long story short I was operated on without sedation, got a large PE on my lung due to being bedbound for so long, told incorrectly I had bowel cancer and epilepsy (treated for both) and put on enough powerful medication that you could have brought down an elephant. I suffered horrific withdrawals on discharge and because I was sent home without a life saving injection was admitted again in an emergency situation only 48hrs later.

My next four months was spent at hospital 3 days a week as they fought to control the internal bleeding which was being made worse by the treatment for the clot which resulted in my blood being made thinner which in turn made me bleed more. Finally after blacking out in January 2010 I was seen by another specialist who stopped the clot treatment and finally I could have an operation to help stop the bleeding. The bleeding slowed but I was still quite ill and with the added stress of being unable work along with my wife losing her job due to the recession we had to live on £62.50 JSW along with food and essentials being bought by our families.

I like to think I was prudent in taking out protection insurance and we started our claim against insurance giant Scottish Provident in September 2009 as I was too ill to start it whilst in hospital and as you can imagine we had other things on our minds. I had been sold what is called a ”task based” protection policy which meant I had to be unable to do a set number of tasks to get a pay out. These tasks range from 6-8 and you have to be unable to do between 2-3 to get a pay out but consist mainly of; can you hold a pen in either hand, can you communicate in a way to be understood, walk 200 metres without stopping or being in serious pain, can you hear in a quiet room and read 16 point print all with the help of others or aids? Some might be thinking these sound very similar to the tests currently being used to see if people should be receiving disability state benefits and you would be correct. These policy definitions were taken from the assessment of benefits years ago and are used by insurers for policyholders they deemed to be ”high risk” to insure against the inability to do their own job. If you do any form of manual work, e.g. driving even if it’s just a small percentage of your job the chances are you have a “task based” policy or to give its correct name Activities of Daily Living (ADL) or Activities of Daily Working (ADW).

So in December 2009 Scottish Provident refused my claim because they said I had not experienced any restrictions through my illness or medication even though I was in hospital for three months. We asked to see the reports which left us dumbfounded. The forms were in 3 parts. The first part was about the policyholder, second was looking for non disclosure and if I had caused my illness with the last part asking about my restrictions to six set tasks. Now this is where it got interesting as the form asks for the policyholders current restrictions to the set tasks even though some consultants had not seen me for four months. These consultants said ”we presume he has returned to work or not seen from discharge so don’t know current health condition but after this length of time we would say he should have recovered”. My GP on the other hand knew different and said I was still restricted, having frequent emergency admissions to hospital and did not expect a full recovery until March 2010 as I was also being treated for a blood clot. This was also supported by a private consultant but Scottish Provident said they could ignore this evidence because the consultants in the hospital were more qualified to comment.

Thanks to Scottish Provident for asking me to change the picture. I tweeted lots that they had asked me to do so and what did people think, then tweeted again when I changed it! Thank you Scottish Provident for giving me the opportunity to plug my post not once but twice over a month after posting. Tweeting about it got about 20 retweets to date and about a 1000 views and still going. Cheers! What do you think?

Thanks to Scottish Provident for asking me to change the picture. I tweeted lots that they had asked me to do so and what did people think, then tweeted again when I changed it! Thank you Scottish Provident for giving me the opportunity to plug my post not once but twice over a month after posting. Tweeting about it got about 20 retweets to date and about a 1000 views and still going. Cheers!
What do you think?

On the verge of giving up, we went public and wrote to every newspaper and organisation we could think of in the UK without reply so kept writing to them (over 1000 emails over 2.5years) until The Times Newspaper chief consumer troubleshooter got in touch. The Times ran our story and also featured another couple let down by Scottish Provident with the same policy. This followed by us setting up a Twitter account aptly named @scotprovsaysno which attracted some interest from within the industry. It quickly turned out one leading light within the industry had been raising the issue surrounding these policies for some years without success so how were two outsiders going to make a difference? We just kept on tweeting and soon we had several thousand followers peaking at 13,000 which led to The FTAdviser, Cover Magazine, The Mail on Sunday, The Protection Review, Which?, The Telegraph, AOL Money, Money Marketing and other publications getting behind our campaign. With this added confidence we were in the right we went back to The FOS and won what the media describe as a high profile case against Activities of Daily Living protection policies. But, there is always a “but”. Scottish Provident appealed the decision twice meaning our case went all the way to the Ombudsman who supported our claim and slammed Scottish Provident for the way they handled my case.Back and forth my case went in the internal quagmire of Scottish Provident’s claim handling teams so we went to the Financial Ombudsman Service. A lovely lady helped us through and I told her the evidence was wrong so she suggested we got the correct evidence and then send it to her. We thought this would be easy but the NHS put up brick wall after brick wall as they knew they had totally mishandled my care. It took us to make an official complaint against both Trusts and a face to face meeting before we got the evidence we needed as their approach was it was not in their interests to comment. Armed with new evidence we went back to the FOS only to be told they could not use this evidence as it was not available to Scottish Provident when they refused my claim even though the new evidence supported my claim in full. They returned my claim to the insurer and asked them to assess my claim again based on the new supporting evidence but Scottish Provident just kept refusing my claim.

We could have walked away at this point but as we had nearly lost everything due to my illness including my business we set about stopping anyone else having to go through what we did. We achieved our first major change when insurance giant Aviva agreed to rewrite 95% of all their new critical illness and income protection away from ADL’S and ADW’s to “Own Occupation” definitions. This was a major turning point as more and more insurers did the same except, you guessed it, Scottish Provident who stuck to the argument it’s better to offer a choice even if it’s a poor choice than no choice at all. In September 2012 BBC consumer program Rip off Britain ran our Angry Policyholder campaign http://youtu.be/dOOAhoO54Es and finally after 3 years Scottish Provident admitted defeat and confirmed it would address these policies in 2013. In December 2012 earlier than expected Scottish Provident rewrote new policies and offered more occupations for the superior “Own Occupation” definition which means if you cannot do you job the policy pays out.

Our story and campaign does not end there as not one insurer who sells ADL/ADW policies has addressed the 800,000 policies that were already in place in the UK before the new changes were made. Now, it’s not as easy as this but if you take 800,000 premiums ranging from £13.00 to £70.00 per month that’s a lot of money insurers are receiving when we all know they are hardly ever going to have to pay out on a claim. Some figures suggest that at least 55% are refused with as little as 10% of claims being paid in full so we need help to keep up the pressure. In Brazil, following consumer pressure the government banned these policies several years ago because hardly any were paying out.

So if you have a protection insurance product we cannot stress enough to check if it is “own occupation” and if it is not, you seriously need to consider changing before it is too late. Friendly Insurers do not sell task based policies and so there are options if your insurers won’t cover your occupation. If the industry wants to raise sales of protection insurance products they need to build trust with consumers. They can start by stopping hiding important clauses in small print, making clear that if a policy is to pay out after 4 weeks to make you aware that it could take 12 weeks to assess your claim and finally be more open and honest about pay out figures and stop hiding behind a top line figure which in itself can hide a lot of bad news. For example 2% of claims are refused on average due to non disclosure, but that sounds like the policyholder has hidden some previous medical condition. In fact, cases we have seen involve an ovarian cancer claim refused due to non disclosure of a previous ear infection and this can be even worse if your policy has been sold on to a closed book insurer where a third party decides your claim not your insurer and these companies DON’T publish their claim statistic.

Chris and Nicola

External Links:
FB: Facebook Angry Policyholder

Some of the media articles covering our campaign
This Is Money
MoneyWise
FT Advisor
The Chauffeur
ME Association
Money AOL
Defaqto Independent Report into Income Protection
The Telegraph

Posted in Complaints, Complaints gaining redress | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 18 Comments