Lux in a fLux ....

[carreraboy]

Well sad state of affairs .... since the 20th Feb recovery by a low loader breakdown lorry with no 12v jump start equipment as requested and the subsequent recovery to the specialist repairer losing the sun roof, the Insurance Company involved who allegedly pride themselves on their classic Insurance and Recovery Breakdown policy seem to be still in a sate of deliberation on how to do deal with this.

To date nothing has been sorted, with us continually emailing and chasing it's getting very tiresome .... will soon be time to name and shame, only to protect others who entrust their Classic Porsche to so called specialists. 10 weeks on, and all that lovely weather and still no sign of any resolution. Seems to be some internal buck passing[&:]

 

[craig2105]

I say name and shame them now!

It shoud not take your insurance company this long to determine how to deal with the matter. Perhaps suggest that you might mention their predicament on an enthusiasts forum to a few thousand potential customers. It might galvanise their response.

Good luck

 

[944Turbo]

Nightmare! good luck

 

[djaychela]

ORIGINAL: craig2105

I say name and shame them now!

It shoud not take your insurance company this long to determine how to deal with the matter. Perhaps suggest that you might mention their predicament on an enthusiasts forum to a few thousand potential customers. It might galvanise their response.

Good luck

Have they not already been named?

I'd recommend doing it on twitter if you have a few followers - some seem to be taking notice of this sort of thing (only some, mind).

 

[Pastry]

isnt criticism banned on this forum?

 

[Gordon Attar]

Suggest you tell them verbally and confirm by registered letter that you are going to rent a similar car until they sort it out!

You will be surprised how quickly that usually gets a response, also send a copy of the letter to the insurance ombudsman with a letter of complaint!

 

[Mike_Pollock]

I think 10 weeks is excessive for any insurance company to do something.
I'm guessing that the breakdown aspect is arranged by the broker to add on to the policy with the actual motor underwriter, so I would say the broker needs to buy a new roof and then sort it out with whoever they think fit!

 

[DivineE]

Maybe I should ring them and say I'm concerned about the quality of their service after comments I'd read on the PCGB forum where they are failing to resolve an error they've made? I've only got a mere 2 P'cars insured at the moment but they'd hopefully see the bigger picture if comments are threatening to damage their business.

They screwed me over this year when I tried to transfer insurance to a new car on a policy I'd paid in full and cleverly lost £700 in a scam where by it would have cost me £750 to take the policy elsewhere or I pay £700 over the market money to keep it with them and don't lose the cancellation fee.

I won't say what I called them when I finished that day of useless negotiations about good will and 10 years with them.

 

[pauljmcnulty]

Maybe I should ring them and say I'm concerned about the quality of their service after comments I'd read on the PCGB forum where they are failing to resolve an error they've made?

Probably not. For one thing it's not fair to start branding a company "hated on Club forums", and it's possibly only going to open a legal can of worms.

The reason for having a "no name and shame" rule here is twofold. Firstly it just tends to escalate into abuse, which isn't why we're here. Secondly, and this is a personal bugbear of mine, there's often no right of reply and it's open to anyone with an agenda. Of course not in this case, although no-one would deny that we're only hearing one side of the story we've all known Des for years. But, we've had people using anonymous log-ins here to promote their own business before posing as satisfied customers. Those episodes alone reinforce that you have to be very careful what you let people say either in praise or shame.

This looks like a simple case of insurers who are trying to deal with a series of errors by refusing to help. Call, write and find a manager who will be responsible. Give a fixed deadline on every letter, eg "if this letter has not been acknowledged and actioned within fourteen days from the date of posting I will be using your formal complaints proceedure, which will involve the Ombudsman". Note every name and date you've spoken to, refuse to be fobbed off, and be fair about who should be responsible for each error. I've dealt with insurers over member's claims for years and it's tedious, but usually fair once you get to the right person. []

 

[Nick_USA]

I am just glad my names not 'Adrian'

 

[pauljmcnulty]

ORIGINAL: Nick_USA

I am just glad my names not 'Adrian'

Nick, behave! [][][]

 

[Nick_USA]

ORIGINAL: pauljmcnulty

ORIGINAL: Nick_USA

I am just glad my names not 'Adrian'

Nick, behave! [][][]

Phew just remembered I am OK []

 

[carreraboy]

ORIGINAL: pauljmcnulty

Maybe I should ring them and say I'm concerned about the quality of their service after comments I'd read on the PCGB forum where they are failing to resolve an error they've made?

Probably not. For one thing it's not fair to start branding a company "hated on Club forums", and it's possibly only going to open a legal can of worms.

The reason for having a "no name and shame" rule here is twofold. Firstly it just tends to escalate into abuse, which isn't why we're here. Secondly, and this is a personal bugbear of mine, there's often no right of reply and it's open to anyone with an agenda. Of course not in this case, although no-one would deny that we're only hearing one side of the story we've all known Des for years. But, we've had people using anonymous log-ins here to promote their own business before posing as satisfied customers. Those episodes alone reinforce that you have to be very careful what you let people say either in praise or shame.

This looks like a simple case of insurers who are trying to deal with a series of errors by refusing to help. Call, write and find a manager who will be responsible. Give a fixed deadline on every letter, eg "if this letter has not been acknowledged and actioned within fourteen days from the date of posting I will be using your formal complaints proceedure, which will involve the Ombudsman". Note every name and date you've spoken to, refuse to be fobbed off, and be fair about who should be responsible for each error. I've dealt with insurers over member's claims for years and it's tedious, but usually fair once you get to the right person. []

Well well .... we have been informed TODAY to sue the recovery companies appointed by the broker (who will remain nameless) ...
as these are sub contracted by the Broker the broker is not responsible we are told .... what A TOTAL DISGRACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As if we had any say who recovered the vehicle .... they appointed the recovery companies NOT US .... but our problem if they cause loss or damage ...... but hey they will try and recover our loss .... shame shame shame ....... [&o]

 

[Mike_Pollock]

are sub contracted by the Broker

The broker has a contract with the recovery co - you have a contract with the broker - not the recovery co.

The broker has a duty of responsibility as its their contract with the recovery co involved

 

[carreraboy]

Was mentioned ... but Chris who represents us was adamant that the broker not responsible as the recovery companies were sub contracted ...... chosen the wrong guy to 8**k with.

 

[Northern924]

I'm on leave this week, and as its happens, said company has just been featured on Don't get done get Dom in BBC1 this very morning were someone endured 2 months of non stop calls to said company before the problem was resolved... if its any comfort they did eventually sort it out.

Might be worth mentioning the TV programme see if it hurries them along any, either way good luck, hope you get something sorted soon

 

[Gordon Attar]

Guess which company was being chased by "DOM" today on BBC1 for cancelling a policy without notifying the right person and then that resulted in there car being impounded! and then spending months avoiding taking responsability. They got a result by constantly ringing the responsible managers until they became available and answered the calls! i.e. by being a nuisance!

 

[carreraboy]

Is there a link to the BBC i-Player Gordon?

Oh Chris was wondering why we do not collect the car and take it home ..... Well Chris not road worthy/legal and has a missing roof and we don't have a garage ..... doh!

 

[carreraboy]

Recovery companies denying liability now ..... Apparently:

1. Low Loader lorry man who complained "the company were to mean to fork out for a proper jump start pack, as they are about £500" that he has some voltage regulator that was between his 24volt lorry with a direct connection to the 944, so it was impossible. Despite the firework display of sparks as he crouched in the back of the 944. Amazing how the electrics failed when he left. So despite not having the correct equipment he did otherwise have a device to regulate the charge down into the 944.

2. Well the recovery man then turned up with his low loader who personally reversed the 944 onto the flatbed. Car incidentally parked outside overnight. He now can not recall if the 944 indeed had a sunroof when he turned up! I was there with a neighbour in presence helping to conduct the operation. When he arrived at the Garage he noticed the sunroof missing and according to the Garage propreitor he immediatley panicked and went looking for it .... he reversed the 944 onto the flatbed, thus the opening part was vulnerable to any wind. The electrics having failed, wonder if the mechanism had disengaged. But amazing how sudden amnesia sets in ... why can't people be honest, are we all fools?

Not surprising really, only typifies the kind of cowboy recovery people they employ, suppose because they are cheap! Would have been to much to ask for AA or RAC who are reputable and trustworthy in my experience ..... saga continues[&:]

 

[DivineE]

Please keep us informed. Nothing wrong with a factual list of events and it's interesting to know how these situations are (not) dealt with.