Day 111 - 2nd February 2011

I receive an email from Mark at Aviva.  He tells me that it is the customer’s responsibility to see that a policy meets their needs.  He tells me that he understands that not everyone reads their policy booklet at the time they receive them and that they don’t do it until issues arise as a result of a claim.  He tells me it’s not uncommon for customers to notice exactly what cover they have until such time as they actually make a claim.  He tells me that my policy is through Barclays and if there is any concern over the selling of the policy this would need to be directed to them. He tells me he cannot comment on how the policy was sold.

Mark tells me that he has spoken to the Asprea and they have told him that they have already advised me on the points I have raised. He says however, that he has attached their response as detailed in their email to him.  He also tells me that Asprea have informed him that they cannot move forward with this matter until they receive my contribution to the cost of the work or alternatively agree to a cash settlement.  He tells me that at this stage Asprea await my instructions on how I wish to proceed. 

The information provided by the Asprea in Mark’s email is as follows:

            “ the customer contribution is now £590.26 + VAT. 
  
            The customer is paying towards the removal of any sanitary ware. 
  
            The total tiled area is 16.60sqm of which the customer is paying for 11sqm that is not covered by the insurance. This leaves 5.60sqm of tiling that IS covered under the insurance. 
  
            With regards to the labour costs, we do not disclose this to the customer as this is an agreement between ourselves and individual suppliers.”

I reply to Mark to say that I take his point about it not being uncommon for customers to notice exactly what cover they have until such time as they actually make a claim but say that I would put forth the suggestion that this is not necessarily as a result of the customer not reading the policy document correctly.  It could just as easily be because the policy document is hard to follow. The place I would naturally look for the level of cover I have is the schedule together with the section in the booklet that tells me what I am covered for.  I tell him that as this section is where I would expect to see things that are excluded, it is here that I would expect to see information regarding exclusion of matching items, not a page later on in the booklet that explains about settling claims.  I tell him that I think my booklet is particularly badly worded and that from what Jane at Asprea said when I spoke to her before Christmas, they have clearly had many issues with this before.  I tell Mark that I have attached, for illustrative purposes, the relevant page from my policy document that was provided in 2008 together with a copy of the page that provides the same information in the copy policy that is available on the website today.

I tell Mark that with regards to the information I requested, I refute categorically that they have already provided this information.  I tell him that I now have the entire history of this case detailed in full with all email conversations attached and so can prove that it has not been provided. I tell him that perhaps he would care to send me copies of the emails concerned if he maintains otherwise.  In the meantime I tell him that I would respond to the information he has provided as follows:

1. I asked for the total number of square metres of tiling- I thank him and say that I acknowledge that this information has been provided as 16.6sqm

2. I asked which tiling will be classed as covered by the policy.  I point out that he has not answered this question.  I tell him that the reason I asked about this is that I would like to understand how the section of the clause that says "when damage happens to a specific part or within a clearly identifiable area."  is being interpreted.  I tell him that a particular example that needs clarifying are the walls that house the shower cubicle. I ask how much of them will be covered?   I tell him I need this to be clear so that I can challenge any parts that I do not feel are fair. As a further example of something that needs clarifying, I point out the fact that the rebuilding of the stud wall will disturb part of the tiles that form the splashback surround of the bath and I ask whether the whole of this clearly identifiable area of splash back tiling will therefore be covered.  I tell him that I have attached a plan of the main area of the bathroom so that he can see what I mean. 

3. I asked how many square metres of tiling were classed as covered by the policy – I tell him thank you and say that I acknowledge that this information has been provided as 5.6sqm. I point out however that the email also says that the customer (me) is paying for 11sqm of tiling that is not covered by the policy. Given that there is a total of 15.6sqm of tiling in the bathroom with 5.6sqm being covered by the policy and the remaining 11sqm being covered 50/50 by myself and Aviva,  I ask whether this shouldn't then be 5.5sqm I should be paying for rather than 11sqm?  I tell him that if this information is wrong, it throws into question the quotation for the cost of the tiling I was provided with. I ask whether the quote has been worked out on 11sqm or 5.5sqm.

4. I ask (yet again) that he confirm that I will not have to pay towards the cost of the removal of the fixtures and fittings.  I explain (again) that this is because the Surveyor at the initial visit confirmed that this would be covered by the policy as the entire floor has to be replaced.  I tell him that you can see from the schedule of works that this has been allowed for in the scope. This latest response he has sent me still says that I will be contributing towards this cost and I ask him to provide a clear explanation as to why this is the case.

                                   

With regard to the cost of the labour charge for the tiling, I tell him that I feel that I have the right to know whether I am being charged at a reasonable rate for work that I am having to pay for.  I also ask him to please explain why the quote for my share of the uninsured tiling is now £590.26 +  VAT instead of the £651.36 +VAT that Nadine provided.  There is nothing in the email to give any indication why this has changed.

Finally, I tell him that I should like to advise him that at the weekend my husband and I were considering options available to us to try and get the bathroom back to a similar state it was in before the leak occurred and that we had discussed possibilities that would be available to us by removing existing tiles for re-use. I advise Mark that having decided to see how easily the tiles could be removed, the tiles came off the wall incredibly easily despite us having no building experience whatsoever.  I tell him that having left the tiles in a bucket of water over night we were easily able to remove the grout the next day and so with hardly any effort at all we now have 3 tiles in as new condition that could be reused. I tell him that this raises considerable doubt over claims that the reason they were not saved for re-use as agreed was because "it wasn't possible." I point out that in fact it was no problem at all to save them - either Safeguard just didn't bother or Asprea didn't tell them to. Either way I have been caused un-necessary expenditure and I would like to know who is responsible.  I tell him that I have made a video recording of how easily the tiles can be removed and can provide it as evidence if necessary. 

I also ask if he is honestly expecting me to pay my share of the contribution up front and before I even get to see the standard of the works completed to confirm that I am happy with them.  I tell him that I doubt very much whether the Claims Management Company pay for the work before it is done so it is beyond me why I should have to do so!  No one pays for work to be done until they have seen the standard of what they are paying for and I ask him why I am being asked to do so. I am fully prepared to use the internet to make enquiries of other Aviva customers to find out if it is standard practice to request up front payment in circumstances such as these.  If it is not, then I shall be very annoyed and will take it as an inference that they think I am dishonest and a deliberate attempt to make this experience even worse than it already has been. I tell Mark that I hope he can understand that I cannot proceed until he has clarified the points I have raised and so I hope he will be good enough to provide an accurate and speedy response.