Refuses to honour policy/ rejects claims
This company underwrites 24/7 Home Rescue Boiler Insurance.
The company said my boiler could not be economically repaired but would happily charge me around £400 (including excess) to fix it or sell me an overpriced new boiler installation. I refused and so it kept my £95 excess payment, cancelled the policy and left me with a faulty boiler.
I formally complained that it never stated in the policy document that the way it would determine Beyond Economical Repair (BER) was by using the original boiler value and percentage depreciation year by year to come up with a figure based on its own calculation. I also explained that the contract/policy terms insufficiently and ambiguously define BER. For example, “current” was understood as market value of a new boiler but it told me it means a depreciated value based on an original value it decided. The company falls foul of the contra proferentem rule, which in contract law states that any clause considered to be ambiguous should be interpreted against the interests of the party (the company in this case) that created that clause be included.
In the IPID document, the insurer states under what is covered, "Unlimited assistance and repairs, with cover up to £1,000 per claim including parts, labour and VAT." and gave no caveats. I was therefore missold the insurance policy.
I referred the company to the most comparable case the FOS upheld a complaint in: Astrenska Insurance Limited, where the boiler was wrongly declared as BER, the calculation for determining BER was flawed and the wording in the policy did not match what was being said by the insurer after the engineer visit.
Like other boiler insurers, any calculation should be based on current market replacement (new) value, not a depreciated figure. The company contacted me before my policy commenced to record the age of the boiler and other information, so had the opportunity to advise the 19 year old age could make the boiler in virtually any claim BER according to its undisclosed criteria very likely. It did not decline insurance coverage.
The company has admitted that the boiler is repairable but it just doesn't want to pay for the repair based on its less reasonable than industry standards for determining BER. The cost of repair that the company claimed was just £22.74 above its BER limit of £250. It also disclosed that the manufacturer might be able to fix it and not declare it BER but it will not accept another company’s (even the manufacturer’s) opinion that the boiler is not BER.
Starting legal action using UK business address at
Evolution Insurance Company Ltd, 53a High Street, Saffron Walden, Essex, United Kingdom, CB10 1AA