AA Insurance - What a joke!!!

More
10 years 1 month ago #31752 by highgirl
I cannot believe the terrible service we have had from AA Insurance since the earthquakes - their response almost seems like a joke.

Nothing has ever really been resolved because EQC estimated damage at $16500 and AA estimated it at $216000 ... so we left it in AA's hands because the advice they gave was that they would need to ascertain why the difference occurred and go from there and of course it would be unwise to go along with EQC because if they were wrong and all this other work did have to be done, then we would stuck, hence we sat tight most of last year waiting for something to happen - with our house empty but covered by loss of rent until Nov.

When Nov came around we spoke to AA and said whats happening and they told me that they had sent it through the discrepancy process.

We followed it up at the beginning of the year and were told that actually for it to be a discrepancy a whole lot of other reports needed to be done, ie engineers etc so really it was just up to EQC.

Soon after that I also got another email from the claim manager with a link to a website all about mittenfish changing sex :confused: the relevance to my claim escaped me ... whoops it was his interoffice joke email wrongly sent to me!!! Nice that I'm paying premiums for him to sit around drinking coffee and googling mittenfish [}:)]

I then complained about that and heard nothing back, however he did apologise next time I spoke to him and told me he had "accidentally" sent it to me because my name was similar to a girl in the office.

Three weeks I was getting wound up about it all again and tried to find out how to make a formal complaint. I just got put onto the claim manager I've always dealt with so I asked to speak to his superior (funny enough their voices are almost identical!)

They promised me they'd look into it and ring me back early the next week... of course never heard from him so I rang again today and asked for their complaints policy. again they did not give it out...I said I was sure they must have it written down - the answer was "sorry I'm just the person who answered the phone in the queue" [:0]

She said someone would ring back in 10 minutes ... so ten minutes later the guy who was meant to have rung back last time rang to apologise ... "it had completely slipped his mind" [}:)]

Great way to keep custom, really show them how much you care AA!

Sorry thats off my chest now

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425404 by kate

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425406 by billmckinstry
The Christchurch disaster has really bought to light two factors.

One.. All Insurance Companies make their money by collecting premiums and avoiding pay outs, as much as they can.

Two.. The Govt Earthquak and War damges levey, we all thought was a great idea, has not turned out so good after all. Still may well be better off then many other contries but Insurance companies have used this to further their ability to avoid claims.

Maybe if the Govt changed the law and made the levy an Insurance Company issue ie your policy must cover such events and the Insurance company will then be compensated by the Govt. This means you don't deal with EQ.

As it is a Levey on Insurance Policies, then only Insured pay and are covered (I assume) so why not have the Govt and Insurance companies deal with who pays what. You just get whatever your normal accident cover will provide.

Of course with Christchurch, the Govt (nanny), decided they know best who has to move and who can stay. As in most, cases where govt "knows best", many people are not happy.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425419 by Simkin
Bill, being a Christchurch citizen I do disagree with your take on EQC.

No insurance company in the world covers land - only EQC does. And many many people here in Christchurch are very thankful for this.

Eqc only covers a proportion of the land - a few metres around the house. So the government stepped in and said that they pay people the GV value of their land.

There are heaps of people who would like to be red zoned and get paid out because it is unlikely that anyone else but the government would be interested in buying their property.

What's paraded on TV are a minority. It's not like that. I know several people from the red zone who have bought a house much nicer than what they had in a much better area than where they used to live and still have money left over for some extras. they are the lucky ones.

The unlucky ones are those who have to stay and don't want to.

Highgirl - I don't see the problem. If EQC estimated the damage to be higher than $100 000 then you get the maximum payout from them which is $100 000 + GST. This payout is then passed on to your insurance company and they will be responsible for fixing up your house. If reports are required it's probably to assess whether it is a rebuild or a repair.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425421 by DiDi
Replied by DiDi on topic AA Insurance - What a joke!!!
Well said Simkin. That is exactly the situation and really the entire thing comes down to logic. If you are covered by EQC which you obviously are and they are prepared to pay out $100,000 plus GST I believe that you take the $100,000+ and your argument is then with your Insurance Company regarding the rest. How would this not work?

Bear in mind I am not in Christchurch but this is how it SHOULD work surely? EQC are only liable for $100,000 + GST (correct me if I am wrong by all means) so just not understand where the issue is beyond that. What am I not understanding?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425426 by Anne
Replied by Anne on topic AA Insurance - What a joke!!!
Ummmm, but EQC is saying the damage is only $16 500: well under $100 000.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425432 by DiDi
Replied by DiDi on topic AA Insurance - What a joke!!!
Anne - does that make a difference? Take the $16,500 (well within the $100,000) and settle the balance with your insurance company who you have paid (presumably in Replacement cost) to balance the difference. They said $21,600 so we are talking $5,100 for their insurance cover to balance what their assessers quoted. What is the problem?

If this is the stupidity that is going on in Christchurch, then no wonder it so protracted and ridiculous.

Bear in mind that I worked in Insurance some years ago and I get incredibly frustrated at the mind set of the clients who let their insurance companies walk all over them. Every insurance company has to have a complaints policy that states they HAVE to produce it when you cannot settle and you can challenge any decision they have made.

How to make a complaint

There are a number of steps that you should take if you have a complaint about your personal insurance:
Contact the branch manager of your insurance company.
If the branch manager is unable to resolve your complaint, you can make a formal complaint to your insurance company's controlling officer or person responsible for handling complaints.
When your formal complaint is received, your insurance company must do the following:
Acknowledge your complaint within three working days
Investigate your complaint and advise you of its progress or outcome within ten working days
If the company is unable to resolve your complaint, they must inform you within two months. The company must also advise you of your right to take the complaint to the Insurance and Savings Ombudsman.
If your insurance company is unable to resolve your complaint, you may approach the Insurance and Savings Ombudsman to consider your complaint.

The Law may have changed but there was another step that basically you could force your insurance company to sign off on, that enabled you to take them to the Disputes Tribunal (maybe not - perhaps someone else knows or I could look it up!) but to be in this position so many months down the line makes no sense to me - apart from the number of claims but maybe it is in the Companies interest to behave this way and postpone settlements. I have no idea but get strong and get staunch highgirl. No sitting on the couch - make it happen as they won't.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425437 by Simkin
I think Highgirl has either forgotten a '0' or put an additional '0' on on one of the values.

If the discrepancy really is that big - $199.500 - then it is a problem.

I live here amongst all those people who have damaged homes - us included. We have had our chimney taken down by EQC but no other work has been undertaken. Some homes are being repaired but the majority is waiting. It's been said that it may take 5 years. I don't see why landlords should have priority to have their rentals repaired.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425442 by DiDi
Replied by DiDi on topic AA Insurance - What a joke!!!
I was wondering why Simkin said that and you are right - it is a big difference regarding where the O is but the logic does not change as to settlement.

As I said, I am not in Christchurch and so fairly ignorant about how these things are being dealt with but what I don't understand is that if you have a Replacement Policy on your (Highgirl) House and EQC has to cover the first $100,000+GST - your claim is clearly for more than that (as noted by EQC) , then your Insurance Company should be saying "Yep EQC - pay out the $100,000 + GST and we will settle the balance with our client. What the hell is going on?

Perhaps if you are in the Red Zone or whatever (one of the not clear zones) just remember that your Total House replacement insurance also allows you to take what is called Present Day Value which will be less but that should be your choice if you want to move somewhere else. This sitting on the fence by all concerned is nuts.

If the other figure is correct and we are only talking under $20,000, then again, why the hell should that matter? EQC pays their dollop and you settle the rest with your insurance company to whatever that is worth. Who cares what EQC said - if it wasn't an earthquake and your house partially burnt down in a fire, they would still have to pay for the repairs and thanks to EQC, it will cost them (AA) a lot less than if it had been a fire. Jeez! Am I missing something?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425446 by Valmai
If Highgirl's figures are correct then her ins.co. will want 100000 from EQC so they pay only 126000. If she takes eqc's current offer she would have to make up the difference herself (84000) her ins.co. will not stump up for one cent more than they have to. If she has missed a zero off the first amount and it is 165000 then the problem is probably due to apportionment, and the ins. co. want the full 165000 from eqc so their bill is only 61000.

Carbon-based biological unit.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425453 by DiDi
Replied by DiDi on topic AA Insurance - What a joke!!!
This is an interesting article (note the date) as I was basing what I was saying on the Insurance Company "topping up" the amount that EQC agrees to pay.

I had just presumed that it would be "seemless" when the Insurance Companies Assessors had come up with their own figure. How can they back down on that now? Weird.

Worth reading though: http://www.interest.co.nz/insurance/50655/things-you-should-know-get-quake-claim-accepted-and-getting-it-paid

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425471 by highgirl
Yes, my figures were correct ... a whooping $200k difference. My problem is ...

had AA Insurance said right at the beginning that they needed all these other things, we would have got them underway.

If they'd dropped it, we would have been on EQC's doorstep and probably further up the list of repairs.

Our mistake was we trusted the insurance company to handle it, and 20mths down the track I have not had one trades person on my property!

AA have just dropped it as far as I can understand. Whatever the situation, we can't get an answer out of them.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425517 by Valmai
The truely sad (criminal?) thing is that Highgirl's story is not uncommon.

Carbon-based biological unit.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425519 by billmckinstry

Simkin;423251 wrote: Bill, being a Christchurch citizen I do disagree with your take on EQC.

Great to hear that most are happy. My post is related to building repair/ replacement.

You are correct regarding Insurance of land which most people thought was not required, until Christchurch came along.

Building issues alone, I still believe it would be simpler for your insurance coy and EQ to resolve who pays rather then you get shunted around when you have been paying your insurance premiums.

Just like car insurance. You pay a premium and your insurance coy recovers what they can from the other party and or their insurance coy.

The Govt offer to buy the land is great. Where they are wrong, in my opinion, is forcing people to move.

New Zealand is a world leader in EQ building code and experience with same but no one foresaw the need to rezone such a large area of residential land.
Time will tell if it really is req'd ??

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 years 1 month ago #425607 by Simkin

billmckinstry;423362 wrote:

The Govt offer to buy the land is great. Where they are wrong, in my opinion, is forcing people to move.

New Zealand is a world leader in EQ building code and experience with same but no one foresaw the need to rezone such a large area of residential land.
Time will tell if it really is req'd ??


I agree with this. However, there may be one or two residents per street who don't want to move and it is uneconomical to maintain power, gas and sewer just for them. In the areas to be abandoned even 5.2 magnitude aftershocks have caused liquefaction and ruptured the sewer lines. Such an event is not rare and can occur again.

To your second point: A lot of the flat land to be abandoned has sunk. 1m high levies have been built to protect it but the ground water table can't be changed. These residents now experience flooding during each king tide which happens two or 3 times per year. Some 'dutifully' make insurance claims for carpet, sofas and the likes each and every time.

You may have heard yesterday, that some Parklands streets who wanted to be red zoned have gone green - despite liquefaction occurring. This land has not sunk and therefore the residents have to stay.

There is nothing for the media to report if they talk to the people happy with the decision. They have to seek out the very few who don't want to move from their red zoned properties. Most of the houses have been abandoned a long time ago, grass is growing hip high, nobody maintains anything.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.238 seconds