I’m going to pull the card after reading all of this…… my wife is a certified chartered Insurance broker and she chuckled as I showed her this.
If they offer a policy and sell a policy they are liable to provide that policy. There is zero ‘get out clause’
It is not Peugeot offering the policy, it is UK insurance limited who underwrite and take full responsibility.
So no, not a billion pound organisation at all.
Just a way for Peugeot to upsell insurance at point of sale to make a measly £20 admin fee.
Let’s not mention the Ombudsman and FCA either who wouldn’t even it let it get past the point of threatening court action.
Y’all missing my points
I said I’d give up. One last post.
Yes. I agree with all this. The points I am making is, you insure with a company based on their competence to insure. Peugeot demonstrate none given their pre-sales havent a clue whether you’re covered or not. What’s to say their claims department is any better?
Yes we have protections as consumers of insurance products. Do you really want to risk having to use those protections whilst already going through what’s likely a very stressful audeal if you’re having the claim. Yes you can always stand up for your rights. We know this. Next.
If you haven’t already bought an insurance product from them, knowing the facts about the inconsistent pre sales message is important, and given we don’t know how good their claim department is (and can only base on other correspondence), its helpful for people to make an informed decision to know the facts.
UKI or not, you do not deal with them. You deal with Peugeot. You rely on their competence to avoid any form of regulation complaint and/or litigation. The regulators are not a replacement for litigation, either. Even if an ombudsman rules in your favour, it doesn’t have to end there, you can then move on to trading standards etc, none of this is new to anybody.
The points I’m making aren’t one of questioning the validity of said insurance. We agree on this, and we have throughout the entire thread. Nothing points to not being valid in their formal paperwork and policy booklet.
It’s the risk and stress of having to enforce the validity in the event they refuse to honour a claim. Insurance is supposed to remove that burden.
I’m not saying they will or won’t. In reality the only indication of competency we have is their pre-sales show which demonstrates a total lack of it.
Let’s not pretend complaining to an ombudsman is an easy feat. Let’s not pretend they always get it right. Let’s not pretend everybody is in a position to litigate.
Until we see an honoured claim, that was honoured without difficulty,
none of us know anything about how good of an insurer Peugeot are, or whether you risk a 50/50 chance of needing regulatory/legal support, just as it’s 50/50 luck of a sales advisor on the phone selling you the insurance in the first place.
Jeeeeesh.