More Than Home Insurance refusal to settle claim.

[birley66]

Hi - Firstly if I have posted in the wrong place please advise, this is my first one ever. In November 2013 I was robbed, someone quite simply walked in through my unlocked back door and took anything of value that was in my kitchen including my safe containing money and valuables. Today I have been informed that they are not going to settle the claim because I have bred two litters of puppies (family pets) in the past twelve months and therefore they have deemed my home as a business because the puppies were sold and prospective buyers came to my house. I am not a Licensed Breeder as I do not breed 5 or more litters in a 12 month period and my dogs are pets, the guidance notes on any local authority website clearly state that 5 or more litters is considered a Licensed Breeder - More Than are telling me that there is a exclusion to "sneak-in" robberies where the dwelling is used as a business and that had my home not been a "business" the claim would of been settled. Can someone please advise on this because this is the only reason that they have citied for non-settlement after a 7 month wait and lots and lots of investigation into my life & history - for the record this is my first insurance claim ever so there are no issues with past claims and I have given ample proof of any purchases and had meetings with three Insurance Investigators and this it seems is the only reason they can find not to pay - Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

[bigbigproblems]

Re: More Than Home Insurance refusal to settle claim.

Hi - Firstly if I have posted in the wrong place please advise, this is my first one ever. In November 2013 I was robbed, someone quite simply walked in through my unlocked back door and took anything of value that was in my kitchen including my safe containing money and valuables. Today I have been informed that they are not going to settle the claim because I have bred two litters of puppies (family pets) in the past twelve months and therefore they have deemed my home as a business because the puppies were sold and prospective buyers came to my house. I am not a Licensed Breeder as I do not breed 5 or more litters in a 12 month period and my dogs are pets, the guidance notes on any local authority website clearly state that 5 or more litters is considered a Licensed Breeder - More Than are telling me that there is a exclusion to "sneak-in" robberies where the dwelling is used as a business and that had my home not been a "business" the claim would of been settled. Can someone please advise on this because this is the only reason that they have citied for non-settlement after a 7 month wait and lots and lots of investigation into my life & history - for the record this is my first insurance claim ever so there are no issues with past claims and I have given ample proof of any purchases and had meetings with three Insurance Investigators and this it seems is the only reason they can find not to pay - Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Financial Ombudsman. Make official complaint - wait 8 weeks or get deadlock letter. Compile evidence.

[birley66]

Re: More Than Home Insurance refusal to settle claim.

Hi Please explain the term "deadlock letter" - I intend to gather evidence and complain to the FCA but would like clarification on what is deemed as a business, I have no livestock or outbuildings and the dogs live in my home and have done for nearly four years but have only been bred once - is this a business?

[bigbigproblems]

Re: More Than Home Insurance refusal to settle claim.

Hi Please explain the term "deadlock letter" - I intend to gather evidence and complain to the FCA but would like clarification on what is deemed as a business, I have no livestock or outbuildings and the dogs live in my home and have done for nearly four years but have only been bred once - is this a business?

Sorry for the jargon.

Forget about the FCA for now.

Complain to your insurers. Ask it to be an official complaint, with the view to escalate this to the ombudsman. Generally at this point they will pay up.

If they dont, they provide a deadlock letter. This letter is something you can take to the ombudsman allowing them to look at your case, showing you have exhausted their internal complaints procedure.

If they don't provide a deadlock letter - and don't sort out the problem within 8 weeks of your original complaint then you can go to the ombudsman anyway.

The ombudsman charge a large fee for looking at the case, they are also generally on the side of the consumer. So insurers and financial institutions of wary of getting to the point where you have to use them. They will sort this out for you.

EDIT - a large fee to the insurers, you arn't charged a penny. It's also binding to the insurer but not to you. So if you lose at the ombudsman you can still sue the insurers.

[birley66]

Re: More Than Home Insurance refusal to settle claim.

Hi

Thanks for the information - one more thing I wanted to ask was with regards to the Insurance investigators. I had no hard copies of pictures of the valuables that were taken but they were on a file (computer) which I sent to Photobox (the file that is) for the images to be developed and then sent the photos to the investigators at RSA - when I emailed to see if the claim had progressed weeks later I was informed that they had enquiries to make with Photobox but did not explain what these were but I assumed that they were checking to see if the photos were indeed 5-7 years old and not simply taken just before or after the robbery - my question is has the insurance investigator broken the Data Protection by contacting Photobox about my account with them and am I entitled to know what these enquiries consisted of as I feel that they may have broken rules in trying or obtaining information about me from another Company that does not have public access. If anybody can help me on this please advise.

[bigbigproblems]

Re: More Than Home Insurance refusal to settle claim.

Hi

Thanks for the information - one more thing I wanted to ask was with regards to the Insurance investigators. I had no hard copies of pictures of the valuables that were taken but they were on a file (computer) which I sent to Photobox (the file that is) for the images to be developed and then sent the photos to the investigators at RSA - when I emailed to see if the claim had progressed weeks later I was informed that they had enquiries to make with Photobox but did not explain what these were but I assumed that they were checking to see if the photos were indeed 5-7 years old and not simply taken just before or after the robbery - my question is has the insurance investigator broken the Data Protection by contacting Photobox about my account with them and am I entitled to know what these enquiries consisted of as I feel that they may have broken rules in trying or obtaining information about me from another Company that does not have public access. If anybody can help me on this please advise.

talk to photobox. They held your data. If they have given out information then your complaint is with them and not the insurer.

if they suspect fraud they have to tell you. They can't use an excuse to not pay out if fraud is suspected. Do as I've said and see what happens. Unless you are lying on here (not saying you are) then you will get a pay out.