Recapping on this thread, [sorry this is so late but I was away from the forum for much of 2007. I hadn’t imagined you would miss me that much! ]
Why am I interested? My son has a 2002 Scenic with mirrors that adjust even without the key. Plus, my two lovely grand-daughters often fall asleep in the car on their way home from visiting me.
I would have argued this out until they conceded. You pulled the fuse and reduced the damage and thereby minimized their costs (as is your obligation to do). I believe a court would order the insurer to pay out for the resultant fire-damage but not the switch. You also need to consider the amount of uninsured excess which might not make claiming worthwhile.
26th June 2007 #32 codeye
Mine did it 2 years ago, pulled the fuse before it took the whole car; it only took the wiring loom (or whatever its called) out which was dear enough! Could not claim on insurance.
Sounds a bit odd to me? Where you insured Third Party Only or something?
You would be claiming for the damages resulting from the fire (especially if flames were visible when you pulled the fuse). The loom burned out (the effect) because there was a fault (the cause). If your rear-screen wiper-motor burned out and the heat took the paint off your tailgate, wouldn’t the insurer honour your claim for repainting your tailgate? If your mirror-adjuster short-circuited and caused a fire that burned your door, dashboard, seat et cetera, wouldn’t the insurer pay for the repairs? The only difference I perceive is in the quantum of damage… Loom only as opposed to loom, door lining, dashboard, upholstery, paint, etc., etc, etc.
26th June 2007 #38 codeye
Fully comp, just found this on esure’s website under exceptions:-
• Any mechanical, electrical, electronic, computer or computer software
breakdowns, failures, faults or breakages.
Precisely my point and that is how I have always known it to be interpreted.
28th June 2007 #92 Horatio
Quote:Originally Posted by twillco
I'm also concerned about the insurance issue after reading codeye's post. "• Any mechanical, electrical, electronic, computer or computer software breakdowns, failures, faults or breakages." Surely that refers to the component itself failing, Surely you are covered against fire though even if it is caused by a fault/failure, or maybe not it seems. I don't fancy reading my policy booklet though.UNQUOTE twillco.
I read that clause effectively as "if a component fails, your insurance doesn't cover the replacement of that component." Without that wording, your insurance would double as a pretty effective warranty.
Your insurance effectively covers you for damage caused by accident or fire. How the accident occurred or how the fire started should not be relevant unless foul play is suspected.
It is a good thing that you have 14 days to reject their policy once you receive the document... read it carefully otherwise you would only have fire-cover if you left the car somewhere and the place caught fire taking your car with it. Hmm!!! I don’t think I would want that somehow! Of course, they might still try to argue that the fire started because of a mechanical/electrical/electronic failure of the security system. I don’t believe that to be the spirit of the contract and insurers would only attract the sympathy of a court where it was proved there was an intent to defraud.
Codeye is quite correct,
A lot of insurance policies state that fires caused by an electrical fault in the vehicle are not covered. I am lucky that mine is but I didn't know about this clause. A friend had an electrical fire in a VW Golf and he didn't get a single penny from the insurers.
Makes you a bit sick that they don't draw your attention to that bit in the smallprint.
Can you be specific and say what their objections are? If possible, quote your insurance policy and remain factual so you won’t be interpreted as naming and shaming, which the moderators will not allow. But you should be able to say “They said this” or “I said that”. It should be the insurers taking up your case against Renault and paying for litigation in hope of saving themselves the cost of repairs or write-off [unless they are also owned by Renault of course].
2nd July 2007 #100 fireball scenic
..... In the meantime it's me versus Direct Line to get the money I'm due out of them as they are taking the p**s at the moment! - Cheers Dave
@OG: I’m sorry to disagree with this name-and-shame ban. The author should be directed to be factual and to limit himself to facts alone. He should be able to say who his insurers are and what objections they have raised against his claim. He should also be allowed to say how long it takes them to reply to his communications but he should refrain from drawing contestable generic conclusions. He should be allowed to say that he is dissatisfied and doesn't intend to insure with them again. Insurers make huge claims in their advertisements and none of us can possibly counter their hyperbolic claims. A member should be able to state his “considered opinion”. If necessary, the forum management can say that it does not necessarily agree with individual opinions. Without free speech we might as well move to Baghdad.
8th July 2007 #125 fireball scenic
..... My only comment is "Don't let any money pass through your hands on insurance to [EDITED BY OG: Sorry mate, you can't name and shame], they will only stitch you when it comes to a claim" BE WARNED.
Did the owners of the green Scenic have trouble with their insurer also? If they had no problems it would be a good thing to say who they are so we can applaud them.
Have your insurers turned down your claim or are they just treading water and taking their time sorting it out?
17th July 2007 #133 fireball scenic
Just to update, No more news yet!! I did however receive a phone call from the owners of the green Scenic on Ebay (I traced them through the DVLA who were kind enough to forward a letter for me). Their circumstances were identical to ours, in that the car was parked at the time of the fire. VOSA have contacted me to say that they expect to hear early next week what the progress is from Renault UK. In the meantime my insurers "Indirect Line...." still haven't resolved my claim, never reply to letters or return phone calls (Still waiting for a returned call from thursday last week). You don't know how good your insurers are until the time you need them.