Highway Insurance have finally settled my claim

[BlitzBoy]

hmmm yeah I think you guys may be right I wont direct them to this thread/forum. I think I will just say that members of my club and similar clubs will not be using Highway Insurance from now on.

[Phil]

My reply would be something along the lines of:

"Thank you for your letter of the 4th August 2006, which has been referred to myself as the person responsible for complaints in the Claims Validation unit. Your complaints against Highway Insurance concern the way in which this matter was dealt with and the outcome concerning the indemnity for the above incident. I have now fully looked into the matter for you.

I am sorry if you found our claims process concerning. I have noted your comments and investigations has confirmed that the process was correctly administered throughout the period of dealing with your claim. You should rest assured I would take the appropriate action if any member of my staff failed to meet the high standards of customer car, which we insist upon and which customers are entitled to expect.

Your claim was primarily declined because the incident fell outside the scope of the policy. The Surrey Fire & Rescue Service extract of fire report states: “Accidental â€" Fuel supply hose disconnected whilst vehicle in motion, causing fuel to spray into and under luggage compartment. Ignited when indicator tuned on to pull into layby”.
The engineering evidence we have obtained has further supported this. Your policy clearly states under Section 2 Fire & Theft, “What is not covered, Wear and tear, mechanical, electrical, electronic and computer failure, breakdowns or breakages.” As the fire was caused by mechanical failure there can be no cover for damage to the failing part or parts.

I am not asking for you to re-emburse me for the loss of the fuel hose, I am however requesting compensation for the losses caused to my vehicle by the resulting fire. This loss IS insured as clearly stated in the policy.

The policy under General Exclusions states: “This Contract of Motor Insurance does not cover claims arising from any of the following: 7 The insured Car being used on any form of race track or off-road activity” When this office interviewed you on the 3rd July 2006 you were asked if you had ever raced this vehicle and if you were planning to race on the day in question. On the recording you stated, “No, I’m not good enough”. When asked at the end of the interview “ Do you agree that everything you have told me is to the best of your knowledge and belief a true and accurate account of what did eventually happened?” you replied “yes”. You were then advised. “I must advise you that should Highway Insurance later discover that any of the main details you have given us are deliberately misleading, we shall refuse to pay your claim and report such matter to the police for prosecution”.
Highway Insurance has subsequently discovered that you have raced this vehicle previously and on the incident day you were listed to race. Not only is racing of any description outside the scope of the policy, but it also falls outside the scope of the underwriting criteria and had Highway Insurance been aware of your racing the insured vehicle at the inception cover would not been given.

Can you please classify to me your understanding of the phrase "being used on any form of race track or off-road activity". Would you statement include parking on a private car park as an off road activity? Would the intention to use a private car park be required to be declared at this point in the interview also? I should remind you that at no point when I may have mentioned any intention to race on internet message boards in the past was I under oath, and since I do not remember making the statements shown in your evidence I ask you to a) prove that it was myself who made them and b) understand that any previous statement made by myself may have been subject to a later change of mind; and so whilst at some point previous to the event I may have intended to use the insured vehicle on a race track (at a licenced public \'fun day\' event where racing of any kind is strictly prohibited) it was clear in my mind on the day of the event that I had absolutely NO intention to race the insured vehicle or take the insured vehicle anywhere other than the spectators car park of the race track.

Had the insured vehicle been involved in an incident on a race track then I fully understand that a claim would not be honoured, however this incident occured on a public road and was completely un-related to any racing event whatsoever. You must take into consideration the fact that I was very distressed by the incident and the loss of my vehicle, which is also my prize posession, and your intense method questionning regarding the claim further increased my stress levels at the time.

I feel that this is completely unrelated to my claim and the cause of the incident, and frankly I am disgusted that you are trying to reject my claim on this basis.

Regrettably I can see the no grounds to rescind the decision made in our letter of the 21st July 2006.

I trust that I have clarified our position and that you now fully understand the explanation for my decision on this matter. If however, you feel that I have not fully addressed your complaint, you should within eight weeks, write to the Compliance Manager Highway Insurance at 171 Kings Road, Brentwood, CM14 4EJ, to review the matter for a final decision. We shall consider the matter resolved should we not hear from you in this time. If you remain dissatisfied after receiving our final decision, the matter may then be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service, details of which we will gladly provide should they be required.

Yours Sincerely

David G Salter


Phew, let off some steam for you there :chat

[Martiny]

I for one, would hopefully send you £5 towards fighting Highway, I am sure many others would.

[BlitzBoy]

Nice one Phil , my reply is using something similar to what you have used. I will post my reply letter tomorrow once I have finished with it.

Hopefully Martin it wont go as far as court, hopefully the Ombundsman service will resolve it

[iaint]

some really useful stuff

You sound like a lawyer (no offence intended!) and that\'re really good advice.  To summarise...

1) BB isn\'t making a claim for a parts failure but for the loss caused by a fire.

2a) There is no proof that BB claimed to race as the forum is not secure or viewed as a testimony under oath.
2b) The whole concept of racing is a huge red herring as it\'s irrelevant to parking a car in a layby.

[Phil]

I kinda tailed off in my sentance about how distressed you were, but you might want to mention how the situation may have affected your answers to their telephone interview.

Also you may have miss-understood what they meant by intention to use your car on a race track etc.

[BlitzBoy]

well did mis-understand when they said racing, I took as going on a circuit and going up against a bunch of cars . I mean RWYB are not race events so i answered accodingly

[oldone]

Book off work for a month due to the stress it has caused you,then sue them for some compenstaion and for loss of earnings as well :evillaugh

[BlitzBoy]

well I feel really stressed when I got that letter. Well at least im happy in the knowledge that have lost in excess of £20K worth of premuims by people reading this thread

[oldone]

and the rest !!!!!:guinness

[Red and Single]

Phil has the language they dont like, laywer speak, use that mate, they\'ll sh1t themselves !!

[Adriansturgess]

I will post my reply letter tomorrow once I have finished with it.

Yes, post it before you send it just to make sure you haven\'t missed a trick.....

[banned advertiser]

I was talking to a guy the other day in insurance and he tells me Highway do huge numbers of fleet cars and lots of big name brokers.
It might be an idea to contact the major insurance companies and fleet companies and point them to this thread.
They might not want to be associated with Highway if they see the publicity they are attracting.

[Domwhite]

well I feel really stressed when I got that letter. Well at least im happy in the knowledge that have lost in excess of £20K worth of premuims by people reading this thread

Mate I would tell them that the way things are going, you feel like suing them for personal damages resulting from the stress and loss of transport they have caused you.

I would also be up for putting some cash in to help with the legal fees. If you do get a site up, maybe even contact some sponsors as this has 25,000 hits so far and thats great publicity!!!!!! Well not if your Highway:WaveBye

[cannibal]

I for one, would hopefully send you £5 towards fighting Highway, I am sure many others would.

I\'d definately chip in too.