All posts by MrDaz

Darren Jamieson, aka MrDaz, is the Technical Director and co-founder of Engage Web and has been working online in a career spanning two decades. His first website was built in 1998 and is still live today.

Direct Line send me a letter!

I’ve received this letter from Direct Line’s Chris Moat, have a read:

Dear Mr Jamieson

Thank you for your letter dated 5 June 2007 and your patience whilst your concerns have been investigated.

I understand your frustration with how Mrs Jamieson’s claim has been dealt with and how this may have inconvenienced you. I hope to be able to explain the reasons for our actions and our decision on this matter.

The Contract of Insurance for the vehicle P192PLR was agreed between Mrs H Jamieson and her insurance company, Direct Line Insurance. This agreement was based on ‘utmost good faith’. That is to say that when a contract is taken out customers are obliged to disclose any detail which may be of importance to the insurers whether or not it is requested. At the point of inception of the policy, Mrs Jamieson would have been asked, and confirmed, if she was the registered keeper and vehicle owner. We therefore, under the principle of ‘utmost good faith’, had no reason to question this information. Documentation to this effect was issued and the policyholder is asked to ensure that all information is correct. As this documentation was not challenged it is assumed to be correct and forms the basis of the contract.

Mrs Jamieson is our policyholder and we have to respect her wishes regarding how her policy is managed. After your call to report the theft of the vehicle we later received a further call from Mrs Jamieson requesting that we no longer discuss her policy with anybody but her. In relation to the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998, which we must abide by, if a policy holder requests that we only discuss their policy with them then we have to do this. This is the reason we were then unable to discuss the claim with you further. This is In accordance with Direct Line’s settlement process and the process was followed correctly. Once the claim was registered it was then validated and settled on a cash basis with the policyholder, Mrs Jamieson. The vehicle documents were then requested in order for us to take possession of the vehicle.

This case has been referred to our legal department and discussions have been held with Mrs Jamieson’s solicitors in order to make a final decision regarding the ownership of the vehicle. We have been informed that even though the vehicle was insured in Mrs Jamieson’s name you were the main user of the vehicle and we have no rights over the vehicle in question. It is on this basis that your V5 has been returned. The Motor Insurance Anti-Fraud and Theft Register (MIAFTR) has now been updated to confirm that the vehicle is no longer stolen. You have stated that you feel that you were intentionally tricked into sending in your V5 document so that we could retain it. I can assure you that this was not our intention. The V5 was requested in a genuine attempt for us to further investigate your complaint.

I hope I have been able to explain the reasons for our actions during Mrs Jamieson’s claim. I realise that from your perspective Direct Line were refusing to discuss the claim with you and attempting to take possession of your vehicle. This must have been both frustrating and confusing for which I apologise. More effort should have been made to clarify the ownership of the vehicle at an earlier stage.

We have no offers to make in regard to the depreciation of the car, your loan repayments or the storage of the vehicle, as it is not accepted that these costs were incurred as the result of our actions. However in recognition of any inconvenience caused to you I have arranged for a cheque to be sent to you for the sum of 200GBP which I hope you will accept with my best wishes.

I appreciate the time you have taken to make me aware of the problems you have experienced.

Yours sincerely

Chris Moat
Managing Director

Hmm, 200GBP? That only just covers the loan repayment on the car for the last 4 weeks. I find it hard to believe they say they’re not liable for the depreciation, storage and loans when they have admitted that they should have tried harder to ascertain who owns the car at the beginning.

Obviously I’m going to refuse this, it’s insulting.

I’ll post my reply to this next week.

Transformers released today

It’s July the 4th, Independence Day, and the day I’ve waited for for over 20 years; Transformers is released, in the USA at least.

Obviously I’ve already seen the film as I was at the premier in London 2 weeks ago, and you can read my review here.

The UK release date isn’t until July 27th so we’ve still got some time to wait, but the release today in the USA has generated huge amounts of traffic for my Transformers websites (over 85,000 page views yesterday) so it’s all very exciting.

BT stagger me for incompetence again

If you remember my blogs about trying to get broadband with BT, and their constant poor customer service where they cut me off, transferred me the wrong department and failed at every level to do what they’re supposed to; you’ll be delighted to hear I phoned them again last night.

This time, I recorded it…

Have they improved? Well, if truth be told, they’ve got worse. Not only did they transfer me to the wrong department again, not only did I get cut off again, this time they ripped me off as well!

I attempted naively to transfer my phone and broadband to a new address, only this new address needs connecting. Seems that new builds have all had BT installed by default when they were built, but have not been connected; so to connect it BT are going to charge me for the installation… even though it has already been done!

124.99 pounds for something that has already been done by them when the house was built; just for the privilege of being one of their customers, it’s a bloody disgrace.

The arrogant sod on the phone suggested BT were being kind because they could charge customers the full mount, which was thousands. I did point out that customers wouldn’t actually pay that, but what the hell. He seemed to think it was fine.

What made matters worse was that I seem to currently be paying over 60 pounds for broadband and my phone, when I don’t actually use the phone line. He reduced my monthly bill, but not the level it should be, and refused to say whether I was in credit or not. I clearly am, because the only call I’ve made in the last 4 weeks was to BT, and that was a free phone number. Why can’t they just charge me for what I use, not for what they think is enough to cover my expenditures with a little extra thrown in for them?

I asked if I’ll get interest back from them when they calculate how much credit I have. Obviously not; this is how BT make their fucking profits. They hold onto your money for you so you can’t use it. Thieving bastards.

Anyway, the whole podcast will be online shortly – including my frustration at being cut off AGAIN by the useless bastards.

Why does this always happen to me?

RSA Fraud Investigator views my car

Finally, after nearly 12 months since my car was stolen, this Saturday gone a fraud investigator from RSA has viewed my car.

I was a bit surprised however that he didn’t have any technical or mechanical knowledge and wasn’t sure if the engine was reconditioned or not. He did say in his opinion it was a recon engine, which of course was not what RSA paid for.

If it is a recon, one has to ask where is the new engine BMW supplied?

I filmed the whole interview as proof that he has seen the car, as let’s face it my dealings with insurance companies over the last 12 months hasn’t inspired me with confidence in them.

I gave him a full rundown of the last 12 months, and filled 11 pages with my statement. Let’s see if this gets me anywhere with regards to getting the car fixed.

Podcast: Direct Line

I’ve just added two new podcasts from last week’s phonecalls to Direct Line insurance. These calls show a possible change of tact from Direct Line as they state that the letter responding to my complaint has been drafted.

First listen to my call with Ray Harper, and then the recorded message left on my phone from Neil Foster. All very exciting.

Stay tuned for the next podcasts where I’ll be revealing the response from Direct Line in full.

This shows that just because an insurance company tells you they’re doing nothing to help, and they’re going to screw you, if you complain enough and make enough fuss you can get justice.

An appeal for Radio 1

I’d like to start an online appeal to raise some money for the good people at radio 1 so that they can hire out more than five fucking CDs at a time from Blockbusters. This way they won’t have to keep playing the same five fucking singles every fucking day, throughout the day.

I don’t wish to hear ‘I get all the girls’ (from a guy who clearly has never had a girl) more than six times in a working day. Then the following week Radio 1 take some of their CDs back to Blockbusters for new ones, and we never hear the old ones again.

I guess this is what is meant by disposable music, but if Radio 1 had the funds, and I believe just 10 pounds per week would be enough; they could play more than five singles each day.

Yes, it’s fucking irritating.

Direct Line Concede Defeat

I just phoned Neil Foster from Direct Line, who left a message on my phone last night saying a letter had been drafted to me.

He told me just now that my V5 was being returned to me, the marker was being removed from the car and a financial offering was being made to me for compensation.

I win…

I feel slightly sad. This battle has been raging nearly a year now, and I’ll miss the struggle in my life. Naturally I recorded the message, and it will be online this weekend as a podcast.