[ad_1]
In January my car was written off after being struck by part of an excavator that came hurtling down the M80 motorway. I counted myself very lucky to have survived the impact, but have been battling ever since with my insurer, Churchill, to get a payout that will enable me to buy a like-for-like replacement.
From the moment it became clear that Churchill would have to cough up – the owner of the errant excavator bucket could not be found – things slowed to a crawl. Documents that were uploaded were “mislaid”.
For a month, it couldn’t tell me where the car was to enable me to collect my personal items, and it failed to come up with a settlement offer.
Eventually, after I logged several complaints, I was offered £10,584, which I refused. My car is a relatively rare 2017 Suzuki Vitara SZ5 DDiS Allgrip with 67,000 miles on the clock.
The Churchill representative who called me – attempting to justify its offer – was able to find only two cars nationwide matching mine. One was hundreds of miles away; the second was practically identical in condition, age, mileage, trim and even colour – and only 30 miles from home.
“Great,” I said. “I’ll go and look at it tomorrow, how much is it?” I was grudgingly told it was £11,850. So, incredibly, by the insurer’s own admission, the amount offered was not enough to buy either.
After investigating my various complaints, Churchill has offered £400 compensation but refuses to increase the settlement offer. Can you help?
JC, Falkirk
In July last year, the Financial Conduct Authority ordered Churchill’s parent firm, Direct Line, to go back through five years of claims after it admitted it had underpaid some customers who had their cars and vans written off. Your case suggests the company has ignored the regulator’s intervention and is continuing to do exactly what the FCA criticised it for.
Churchill tells me it had used “a range of industry-recognised motor retail guides that are regularly updated to reflect current prices … to offer a settlement that fairly reflects the market value of the vehicle”.
After looking on AutoTrader, I agree with you that pretty much the only like-for-like replacement anywhere near you is being offered at £11,850. AutoTrader even calls it a “fair” price. This is the same car that the company referred you to.
Since you contacted us, Churchill has offered another £250 compensation after admitting mishandling your claim, but this still leaves a £350 shortfall.
In your shoes, I would take its cheque, buy the car down the road, if you can, and then take the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service and the FCA.
You will need to give evidence of all the cars being offered, prices, age and so on. I suspect the ombudsman will find in your favour, and it will ultimately cost the company more than if it paid you properly. An absurd stance – other customers take note.
We welcome letters but cannot answer individually. Email us at consumer.champions@theguardian.com or write to Consumer Champions, Money, the Guardian, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Please include a daytime phone number. Submission and publication of all letters is subject to our terms and conditions.
