Sorry MD. My post sounded a little sharp. What I meant to say was that I WOULD need the help of a solicitor with an Ordinary Action (as opposed to a summary action) due to the legalities of the action itself (legal jaargon, etc). But I appreciate the post....

That's exactly my point. You need to call the adjuster and get them to explain why they have told the insurer the vehicle was unlocked with the keys in the ignition. From what you have said, this is not correct. You need to get this sorted first thing tomorrow as the Insurer will be acting on this information. As an aside, there is no need for this to go to underwriters as this is a claims decision. Does the claim fit the criteria or not? Simple question really. Don't really understand why underwriters would need to be involved. Unless you've changed your story somewhere.....

Bernie, I think you and I are arguing, pretty much, FOR the same thing. All I am trying to state is that Hastings have valused the vehicle correctly and that the onus is now on Higsta to provide evidence suggesting the valuation should be increased. I agree with the majority of your comments, however.

Agree with Bernie completely on this one.

That's the double edged sword. To raise an Ordinary Action, I WOULD need the help of a solicitor!

Oh but you will! bwwwwAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahahahah Yes. You will. Oh CB Always there with help, advice and a friendly word.

Eggs Benedictine

Jamborees and partied are too close, no? Paint

Have just emailed my dad He's into this sort of stuff He's actually a metrologist, but was formerlly an electrical engineer. Will see what he says and get back to you....

Why is there only one monopolies commission? x

I think this is class.

"Dundee." Nope. Seems the filter lets any piece of crap through!

"Planet Love"- The Dylans

Damn. I've gone and cultivated a thick sense of humour, fireproof skin......... and wicked undies. Blast..

illness

And I quote "Sometimes the firm will argue that it would be fairer to use the ‘guide trade value’ (the price that a motor trader might pay). Normally this will be less than the market price that the policyholder will have to pay to replace the car. However, the trade value may be a useful indicator where the car was not in ‘guide retail’ condition or where there is evidence that the customer intended to buy a replacement privately. And I go on..... Other sources of reference may be relevant when making or assessing a valuation. For example, we would expect the firm to look at the price guides available to the general public, especially where these suggest significantly different results from the trade guides. Customers who dispute the firm’s assessment of a car’s market value often draw our attention to ‘forecourt prices’ advertised in local papers, and – increasingly – to prices quoted on internet sites. Generally we place little weight on such evidence. Advertised prices for cars are widely understood to be a starting point for negotiation, rather than a fixed price. Which is why I always used all three when completing valuations. In Higsta's case, the lack of a proven service history has cost dearly. If he can prove that the car was serviced regularly, then the valuation should be increased.

Policy wordings state "market value" The market consists of trade and retail value. When I valued, I would start off at a figure between the two and use regional variants (such as autotrader) to gauge the correct figure. It's not a science (as stated above) but it can be predicted. Just like the weather. If the value is not felt to be correct, the onus is ALWAYS on the Insured to substantiate the claimed amount.

1. Get rid of Albany. They are the biggest waste of space I ever had the misfortune to work with. 2. Pursue a claim through your Elephant. if that means submitting your receipts etc, then so be it. 3.Call Elephant once/twice a month (or whatever) and ask how their recovery is coming along. They will chase the Third Party Insurer much quicker than Albany will. I am unsure how the Third Party can dispute your claim. I would be interested to see what their Liabilty wording states under the heading "things we do not know about, but are prepared to quite you for. 4. Get the offeding Third Party insurers' details from elephant and give them a call. Find out what's holding things up. They might not want to talk to you (given Data Protection). Threaten them with court action.See what they say. Also get the 4th/5th/6th party details from elephant and call them too. Find out what's going on with them. This should take you no more than 30 mins. maximum. point 1 is the most important!!!! Ps I'm 10 years NUI motor. Now ex NUI.

As an aside, the only call of note (and the only call the ombudsman would have real interest in) would be the intial call with the underwriter, where the terms of the policy were set out. The FOS has ruled that where an Insured has do to something to physically remain on cover (in this case occupy the house within the 60 day period) it MUST be written in the Insurance contracy CLEARLY. (Just what does OCCUPY mean anyway?!) The subsequent calls would ONLY have prejudiced the Insurer's position IF the Insured had acted on the information and was now financially prejudiced. e.g. you replace your TV because the insurer tells you, only to have them repudiate (decline) the claim. I had to pay out on numerous occasions (in a previous, dead-end type of life with NUI) because of dodgy advice given by underwriters, particularly fronted car policies.

Sounds like the banks are pre-empting what might happen. Looks like £15 (approx) might be the way forward.

Mozilla is notorious for actually being MADE of spyware. Records and relates ALL your usage and habits. IE just lets some slip through from other sites.

Wine makes mummy clever. That's what we tell the kids anyway...

How about "swilfering"? Did I invent something?