Quagmire
Member Since: 27 Jan 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 143
  
|
| Lamps......but they work! |
|
I've got Luxury Cover on my Warranty Direct policy and have just put in a claim for a new bi-xenon as it's sticking.
They have refused it as they say Lamps are not covered. I have said the lamps are working. it's the mechanism that isn't.
They're still not interested so I am taking it further.
Anyone else agree or have had a similar claim approved, or are they right?
Cheers Quagmire Giggity - Giggity
|
 27th Jun 2011 7:51 pm |
|
|
BBDisco3
Member Since: 23 Nov 2008
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 3646
|
Can you ask or do you have the exact wording to which they refer - what does it state.
What do you mean by "sticking"
|
| 27th Jun 2011 7:59 pm |
|
|
packingstrips
Member Since: 24 Mar 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 435
|
Care care plan cover the headlamps if they are sticking...im assuming that it doesnt change form dip to main - main to dip? I cant see any reason why this wouldnt be covered however i would scan your policy docs like a hawk...theres prob a bit in very small print!!
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:03 pm |
|
|
Quagmire
Member Since: 27 Jan 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 143
|
The Warranty Direct engineer said that they were refussed because in the items not covered are  lamps. Giggity - Giggity
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:05 pm |
|
|
Quagmire
Member Since: 27 Jan 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 143
|
I've scanned the docs and it doesn't say anything about Lamp Clusters or motors or electrics that control headlamps. So I thinks it's pretty straightforward.
However the problem is probably due to the fact that they are around £600 each!! Giggity - Giggity
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:07 pm |
|
|
BBDisco3
Member Since: 23 Nov 2008
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 3646
|
Looked at Warrenty Direct on line policy wording and under Luxury
Cover the wording has 2 lots of exclusions:- IS THIS THE SAME AS YOURS ?
Electrics
Lamps, batteries, fuses, and connectors, in-car audio
and entertainment systems or navigational systems.
Service Items
Distributor cap, rotor arm, condenser, points, high
tension leads, spark plugs, wiper blades, filter elements,
bulbs belts, antifreeze, fluids, grease, fuel or oils.
Ask them what the difference is between lamp and bulb and under which heading they are refusing.
Once that is established remind them of page 5 which reads:-
LuxuryCare
All mechanical and electrical components of your vehicle are
covered except those listed overleaf.
This exceptional level of protection provides parts and labour cover for all the mechanical and electrical components of your vehicle
with the exception of those detailed on Page 6.
This is one of the best extended warranty protection covers you can get.
Your bulb/lamp is still working so some other mechanical/electrical component has failed and therefore the repair should be covered.
Don't give in !
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:19 pm |
|
|
Quagmire
Member Since: 27 Jan 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 143
|
I agree.
I've told them that....... well ish. What didn't help was that I was talking to an operator who sort of agreed with but said that they cannot go further with this claim as their engineer has signed it as No. Therefore I am now going through their complaints proceedure.
I will win!! 
Thanks all and will let you know.
Quagmire Giggity - Giggity
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:24 pm |
|
|
BBDisco3
Member Since: 23 Nov 2008
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 3646
|
An engineer who has not read the terms and conditions of the policy perhaps.
Have you been told the actual cause of the fault?
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:33 pm |
|
|
BBDisco3
Member Since: 23 Nov 2008
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 3646
|
Quagmire - The definition of lamp from the Oxford English Dictionary is:-
…a device for giving light, either one consisting of an electric bulb together with its holder and shade or cover, or one burning gas or oil and consisting of a wick or mantle and a glass shade…
If Warranty Direct wish to change the definition of lamp then it has to be detailed in the policy wording.
In your case the device giving light is still working but some other component (which is not excluded) has failed. You need to find out what has actualy failed to put your arguement back to them.
|
| 27th Jun 2011 8:51 pm |
|
|
DigitalJunior
Member Since: 22 Nov 2008
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 4401
|
PM'd you the correct contact at WD for this issue. SOLD - 23my Range Rover Sport D300 Dynamic SE
|
| 27th Jun 2011 9:43 pm |
|
|
Gareth
Site Moderator
Member Since: 07 Dec 2004
Location: Bramhall
Posts: 26772
|
Its the low/high beam shutter that has failed, not the lamp. It is very definitely a mechanical device. It just happens to be in the same housing as the bulb.
FYI I had my headlamps replaced under manufacturers warranty because they were intermittently sticking on high beam.
|
| 27th Jun 2011 10:11 pm |
|
|
BBDisco3
Member Since: 23 Nov 2008
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 3646
|
Quagmire - ask for the reason that the claim being declined be sent to you in writing by email/fax so you can have it straight away. Once you have this and with the information you now have from Digital Junior & Gareth you can go back and tell them you have a mechanical failure which is not excluded.
The Insurer has a duty of "treating the customer fairly" and in this case the blatant refusal is against this principal.
The complaints proceedure under a policy can take a little while and in the meantime you either have a car which is not repaired or you will have to lay out £1200 and this is not reasonable.
If the car is not road legal due to the fault then perhaps you should mention that in the event of them failing to deal with the matter "today" and you have to persue the matter as a complaint then you will also be seeking compensation for the loss of night time use. If the repair was a few pound then perhaps you should pay first and then complain, but in view of the amount it is not reasonable for you to have to pay this large amount and is the exact reason you took insurance.
If they don't resolve the situation and you take the matter to the Insurance Ombudsman which is a free service to you, the Insurer has to pay a "investigation fee" to them of around £500 no matter if they win or loose.
|
| 28th Jun 2011 7:34 am |
|
|
BBDisco3
Member Since: 23 Nov 2008
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 3646
|
Quagmire - Any update yet ?
|
| 29th Jun 2011 7:32 am |
|
|
dantheman
Member Since: 12 Mar 2010
Location: Essex
Posts: 1737
 
|
I to have had both "headlamps" replaced under manufacturers warranty as the shutters had failed. The lights worked but stayed on main beam. Give them a tap and they dropped back not a fix just stopped people flashing you. Stand yr ground as that are in the wrong in my view.
|
| 29th Jun 2011 10:01 am |
|
|
dtest
Member Since: 02 Jan 2011
Location: Weybridge
Posts: 140
|
I would simply write a letter to the warranty company stating that you give them 7 days to pay for the repair.
Failing that you will then repair the car yourself and seek to recover the costs from them via the County Court.
In the letter you should state that you are relying on the 'Contra Profentem' rule of English law that states that if a contract is ambiguous then the person who puts forward the contract has to bear any losses caused by the ambiguity 
They WILL pay up eventually
They WILL also change the terms of their warranty document when you win 
|
| 29th Jun 2011 12:11 pm |
|
|
