An insurance boss once told me that he rejoiced whenever his company paid a claim made by a customer.
After all, he said, it was what his insurer was in business to do – offer customers financial protection for the times when things go wrong in their lives.
Sadly, this view no longer prevails across the insurance industry. It now seems that some insurers seek to decline as many claims as possible, using spurious reasons or unjustifiable terms and conditions to reject them.
Earlier this month, I wrote about the awful case of Rachel McNamee whose home insurer (Halifax) refused to meet a claim for extensive damage caused by a leaky bathroom pipe.
Although the basis of the claim was valid, Halifax declined it because Rachel failed to disclose that her son had a conditional discharge overhanging him at the time she bought the cover.
Declined: It now seems that some insurers seek to decline as many claims as possible, using spurious reasons or unjustifiable terms and conditions to reject them
Disclosure of this, Halifax said, would have resulted in cover not being offered. Rachel argued unsuccessfully that her non-disclosure was unintentional, not deliberate – a result of not realising that a conditional discharge was an unspent conviction which she had told Halifax no member of her household had.
Most reasonable people reckon Rachel has been harshly treated. One longstanding loss adjuster (someone employed by insurers to assess the merit of claims) describes Halifax’s behaviour as ‘immoral’, adding: ‘It should be ashamed for even contemplating voiding the policy for a totally unrelated reason. Insurance is based on the doctrine of utmost good faith which Halifax is not upholding.’
Rachel has taken her case to the Financial Ombudsman Service, an independent adjudicator of unresolved complaints, in the hope that it will overturn Halifax’s decision.
Given the ombudsman has just instructed two pet insurers to pay out for claims they originally rejected on spurious grounds (the pets being overweight), Rachel has a fighting chance.
I cannot wait to ‘meet the manager’ of all this rail chaos
It would be lovely to think that the New Year will herald a renaissance in our rundown railways. Sadly, it ain’t going to happen, judging by the chaos over the Christmas break, ongoing industrial action by bloody-minded train drivers’ union ASLEF and continued shoddy service on many lines.
I had to curtail a trip to see Mum eight days ago when the return train from Birmingham to Reading was cancelled at short notice, leaving me with just one other available train – or face a night in a hotel.
I got on it, but it was rammed with people standing in the aisles. All rather unpleasant and tetchy.
Mind the gap: Judging by the chaos over the Christmas break, ongoing industrial action by bloody-minded train drivers’ union ASLEF and continued shoddy service on many lines
Then coming back to work last Wednesday after two days of festive joy, I was unable to get into London Paddington because of maintenance work. I travelled instead to London Waterloo on SWR which was fine apart from being a little bit delayed. The journey back was marred by the fact that all bar one of the toilets on the eight-coach train were out of order.
Given the train was comprised of two separate four-coach units, anyone wanting to use the toilet had to ensure they were sitting in the right unit. You couldn’t make it up.
SWR is holding a ‘Meet the Manager’ session on January 24 at London Waterloo. The idea is for customers to pop along and chat about the company’s service. I will be attending, along with a complaints list the length of one of its carriages.
It could make for a fun early evening, provided I can get home afterwards on an on-time, fully functioning SWR train. Fifty-fifty.
Tax is taxing: Failure to get the return for the tax year ending April 5, 2023 filed in time (deadline is midnight January 31) will result in a £100 fine
Don’t give the taxman a reason to fine you
I quite like the fact that 4,700 people took time out on Christmas Day to file their tax return to Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs.
Although readers may think it’s a rather sad thing to be doing on this most festive (and religious) of days, I disagree.
For some, I imagine it provided temporary respite from the madding family crowd for a couple of hours. For the majority of you who preferred to spend Christmas playing Monopoly and eating vast amounts of turkey, may I remind you that the self-assessment tax deadline is lurking on the horizon (if you have already filed, a big well done).
Failure to get the return for the tax year ending April 5, 2023 filed in time (deadline is midnight January 31) will result in a £100 fine. Late payment of any tax owed will attract interest charges. So please don’t give HMRC an excuse to apply these penalties.
After all, the Government (HMRC’s master) has already taken us to the cleaners by freezing our allowances and curbing our ability to earn tax-free income from our savings and investments. A punishment handed out by those who created the mess which we as taxpayers are still paying a heavy price to clear up.
Nonsensical: Many have commented on the similarity between the new WHS brand and that for the NHS
WH Smith’s rebrand is in need of a health check
Rebrands of businesses rarely make sense. Yet it hasn’t dissuaded plenty of companies from spending vast fortunes on them.
The latest is retailer WH Smith which is testing the waters with a new brand ‘WHS’ at selected branches. What it hopes to achieve with this (nonsensical) abbreviated brand is anyone’s guess.
But so far, all it has done is attract bucketloads of ridicule on social media with many commenting on the similarity between the new brand and that for the NHS. Good businesses don’t need to rebrand. Only those struggling to revive their fortunes go down this route.
In the world of finance, one of the most bizarre rebrands of recent times was the renaming two years ago of asset manager Standard Life Aberdeen to abrdn – yes, no initial capital ‘A’.
At the time, abrdn’s chief executive said the new brand was ‘modern’ and ‘dynamic’. But others with more independent minds mocked the change, suggesting the new name read more like ‘a burden’ than ‘aberdeen’. The rebrand hasn’t stopped the company falling out of the FTSE 100 Index.
Rather than going through with its pointless exercise, WH Smith – like abrdn, no longer a member of the elite FTSE 100 club – should focus on its future and the direction it wants to go in.
While most of its stores located in airport terminals and railway stations are modern and welcoming, many of its high street branches look tired. WH Smith has a choice. Either concentrate on its travel shops and abandon the high street stores, or invest some serious money in making its high street branches fit for purpose. Neither option would be helped in the slightest by a rebrand.
Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on them we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money, and keep it free to use. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to affect our editorial independence.
