Face-to-face "interview" for an insurance claim

It seems an entirely reasonable step for a loss adjuster to visit the alleged location of a high value theft, to speak to the person making the claim (and anyone else involved in the claim, eg the person who locked the vehicle) as well as see that both keys are available, look for any cctv that might be relevant etc.

If it is a genuine theft I don’t think you have anything to worry about.

I got interviewed by an insurance investigator when someone ran* into the side of my car and tried to blame me and claim loads of money for non-existent injuries. It was fine. And my case was proven.

* ran as in, on 2 legs, even left a smudge in the dirt on my passenger door, and claimed I'd run him over.

Yep, had loss adjusters out when burglar bill smashed his/their way through our garage roof.

Also had a f2f loss adjustor when we were burgled 6 years ago. Must admit it did cause a bit of additional stress whilst waiting for it as I thought they were going to be trying to catch me out / wiggle out of the claim

Had a look at the home security, presume was checking the property had been secured properly. As it was theyd smashed their way through double glazing with a hammer taken from my smashed in shed, so entry point was pretty bloody obvious. I presume they were looking for keys to the asgard amongst other stuff

As it was he was mostly quite helpful. Helped value inherited jewellery which I had no idea about, add a bit to the claim for my time to repair gate / shed / back door which were all damaged.

Was however a bit funny around replacing an old laptop which I actually had the receipt for, and tried to argue for a much cheaper model (the one that was knicked was a wide screen multi media one). And they wouldn't replace any of the locks, and given the thieves had stolen my keys that was quite an expense on all door locks and all the bike locks

I was not expecting this, so wondered if anyone else had encountered this before and if there’s anything I should be aware/worried about?

People try all sorts on insurance claims, so I guess now they have to be careful. Just tell them the truth. I once had one of them ring me up and discuss the value of my car, but this sounds a bit different

Another 'me too' - I had the loss adjuster out when I had my house almost completely emptied of everything of value. They checked the lock on the front door, saw it was on a 3-lever, and said they would have to turn the claim down (despite the intruder breaking in through a window at the back). Fortunately, I had a separate 5-lever deadlock that they somehow managed to miss, and they eventually settled the claim in full.

It's probably to weed out fraudulent claims, I assume it's much easier to do this in person. I wouldn't worry as you have nothing to hide

I wouldn’t worry as you have nothing to hide

Well they don't anymore.

I think you should live stream the meeting, put the link on here, and let the collective wisdom of STW give you real time prompts for questions and statements to make to the adjuster. "Well, actually, I heard somewhere that..."

sounds like a loss adjuster visit after a high value loss. completely standard and the loss adjuster is there to facilitate the claim in an 'impartial' fashion. whilst they are technically 'impartial', they are engaged and paid for by the insurer, but there not trying to 'catch you out' - keep your answers factual and not emotive and you'll be fine. nothing to worry about

Excellent, thanks for the reassurance all.

I had this when my garage was done. I think they wanted to check that I wasn't trying it on. He turned up and asked me general chatty questions about bikes, so I talked his ear of for half an hour about MTBing and why I had 5 bikes. He was quite nice and it was a really pleasant chat, I think he went away satisfied that I was a genuine enthusiast...

Like the others have said, I am sure it will be fine but I  would say be very aware of seemingly innocuous questions.
"Has your boss ever asked you to do anything for work using your car?" (Using car for work, claim disallowed)
etc etc. just be very cautious how liberal you are with details.
My FIL  had a stroke at 58 and took years to recover, the insurance company visited him and one of the q's asked was if he ever cycled, he told them all about his cycling exploits up to his late 40s. Ins co claimed he was fit as he cycled regularly. All the Drs and hospital evidence was there, he is crippled due to the stroke. Took 12, yes 12 years, of fighting with insurance co and ombudsman to get his life insurance payout.
I dropped my brand new mobile in the kitchen and got 3 phone calls from the ins co asking all kinds of sideways questions. In the end they paid out for a new phone but I felt like I was in the supreme court on a murder charge.
Note -I since discovered lots of house insurers refuse to quote if you have made a mobile phone claim.

Had one over teams on Friday following some water damage to my laptop. Seems they may well analyse the call using some voodoo psyence. I very nearly pulled the "I refuse to consent to transmission of my data for storage or processing in the United States" card just for sheer bedevilment. Also wondering about how the system they use handles ASD-related issues.

“Has your boss ever asked you to do anything for work using your car?” (Using car for work, claim disallowed)
etc etc. just be very cautious how liberal you are with details.

They can't avoid paying a claim for breach of condition unrelated to the claim.

asked was if he ever cycled, he told them all about his cycling exploits up to his late 40s. Ins co claimed he was fit as he cycled regularly. All the Drs and hospital evidence was there, he is crippled due to the stroke. Took 12, yes 12 years, of fighting with insurance co and ombudsman to get his life insurance payout.

That's awful.

For my sins, I've been a loss adjuster for 20+yrs, albeit not in the motor theft arena. The ones I did do were more incidental to the loss, for example vans been stolen for construction kit inside. It's par for the course for an interview. Have both keys ready.

They will be checking for any fishyness, probably scope for any doorbell cameras they could possible look at. Also, expect questions about use. Getting interview facilities could sometimes be quite difficult (which was a fraud indicator!) and I sometimes expected to arrive at the home and some disgruntled policyholder to have taped out a white outline of a vehicle on their drive, proper CSI style! (Don't do that BTW)

Its all very well for others say not to worry but they are they to not just check your whether it a legit claim, but also for things that could invalidate the claim - stories above about the lock just clicked with me, that why he was checking our doors. I thought it was weird as I pointed the rather large boarded up window and said they came in that way....

Hope you arent too shaken up, it took me nearly 5 years to start sleeping at night again and not be on constant guard duty as I was expecting them to come back. Even when we moved house I still had problems, until I fitted cameras and alarms I would go and patrol round the garden if I'd heard a sound whatever time of the night it was. Looking back I should have probably taken up the offer of counselling from the police at the time I was super stressed (we had a 18month old) but didnt realise the long term impact it would have

Still constantly on the look out for shifty types, convinced we were being watched when we were burgled as it was 4pm on a sunday in November, and we only left the house for an hour to take boy#1 to the park.

And there's the chance that they're just plain incompetent. We had a loss adjuster visit ours after some water damage. He accepted the claim but reckoned a fair settlement figure was around £600. We told the insurers if they were so sure the damage would only cost £600 to repair we'd happily accept them arranging said repair. Which they did. At a total cost of around £25k.

Have both keys ready.

One of our cars has 3 keys, maybe the previous owner was adept at insurance fraud 🤣

One of our cars has 3 keys, maybe the previous owner was adept at insurance fraud

A Skoda? Only car I’ve ever come across that has three proper keys.

Mazda 3, maybe there was a clue in the name 🤪

MrsRNP rented a shop. Pissed bloke fell down into the yard area behind the shop. Put a £50k claim in. Loss adjusters visited was really pleased with himself when he found the non BS but still 5lever lock. Insurance dropped us and left us personally fighting 50k.

2nd time - scroat on a non road legal 'crosser on a main road hit my van and ****ed himself. £20k claim. Loss adjuster visit.
Written statement was a million miles wide of what I'd said. Falsements about not wearing glasses (I do all the time) and a few others I've forgotten.

So sorry but my opinion is that they are ****s of the highest order - I hate them more than estate agents and recruitment.

Loss adjusters visited was really pleased with himself when he found the non BS but still 5lever lock. Insurance dropped us and left us personally fighting 50k.

That makes no sense at all from what my understanding of liability is all about. (IANAL)

That makes no sense at all from what my understanding of liability is all about.

As a former claims manager, that wouldn't stand up in a domestic policy, it's not material to the claim,the Ombudsman would be all over it.

I'm not up to speed with the situation on commercial policies, but still sounds unreasonable.

A Skoda? Only car I’ve ever come across that has three proper keys.

Skoda, some Volvos, Mazdas, some Fords (in some markets) ditto some models of VW, BMW and Merc.

My last Volvo had 3 proper keys and one key-key supplied with it.
New one only gets 2 🙁

I've had a visit from a loss adjuster about a stolen bike.

From my experience, be incredibly careful, resist your natural urge to be friendly and a 'host'. No small talk, think before each answer. They are on the job and they want to catch you. All the casual questions about you and the family are painting a picture 'are the kids learning to drive?, does someone occasionally drive to work? is it on the drive EVERY night?'.

Father in Law was refused a claim for new BMW because he was visiting someone and staying at their house. The loss adjuster managed to create a whole life story about him living away from home through carefully worded small talk. Ombudsman found in his favour.

Be careful. 👍

That makes no sense at all from what my understanding of liability is all about. (IANAL)

Yep - nothing at all to do with the claim. The other annoying part was that our original insurance policy didn't state BS locks required only 5lever. After a few years the policy/company was sold and the new company rang MrsRNP (when she was busy in the shop) to run through the details. This is where the BS lock policy was introduced.

Cost us personally quite a few £k to resolve. It turned out I knew the claimant relative who told us after - the claimant booked an expensive cruise with the remaining payout and spent the whole time pissed and didn't leave the ship at any point.

MrsRNP rented a shop. Pissed bloke fell down into the yard area behind the shop. Put a £50k claim in. Loss adjusters visited was really pleased with himself when he found the non BS but still 5lever lock. Insurance dropped us and left us personally fighting 50k

As a former claims manager, that wouldn’t stand up in a domestic policy, it’s not material to the claim, the Ombudsman would be all over it

wouldn't stand up in a commercial policy either (post 2015 insurance act - and they would of been on very sticky ground pre-act), if it can be shown the breach of security condition didn't increase the risk of the public liability loss / claim. Even then, with the public liability claims you would need to be found negligent.

@RNP - depend when this was, but you could potentially seek recourse via the ombudsman or if you had a broker at the time, potentially against them if they breached their duty

@sofaboy
It's done now - we've moved on but it was a sharp lesson that the smiley pleasant loss adjuster isn't actually there to help you through a stressful incident.
It's why I was wary with the van which occurred a short time after the shop incident. Again - a commercial policy as the van was connected to the shop. I could see where he'd used misleading and false statements in the written report. If I'd not gone through it with a fine tooth comb and ammended and signed it they would no doubt have wriggled out as well.

wouldn’t stand up in a commercial policy either (post 2015 insurance act – and they would of been on very sticky ground pre-act),

Useful, I'd left the industry before that came in.

MrsRNP rented a shop. Pissed bloke fell down into the yard area behind the shop. Put a £50k claim in. Loss adjusters visited was really pleased with himself when he found the non BS but still 5lever lock. Insurance dropped us and left us personally fighting 50k.

I find this hard to believe. The breach wasn't material to the loss at all. Ombudsman would hang the Insurers out to dry for that.

Having admitted my occupation, you do have to also appreciate that there is an AWFUL lot of insurance fraud. A company I previously worked at had an entire team investigating spurious claims, some low level, some very organised. So yes, the questioning is relevant to the loss, but to also see if there are any fraud indicators. I remember visiting a company that had three employees declared, but a T/O of £1.3million. It transpired that they had 60+ "self-employed" employees, but they were, in the eyes of the law, employees and were owed a duty as though employees, but the policyholder had worked it round to get a lower premium. That breach was material to the loss and policy terms.

I find this hard to believe

I have no reason to fabricate this and that's exactly what happened. No BS standard on the lock - insurance invalidated. I was there when he visited and I remember him looking explicitly at the lock. It was almost like it was his common practice.

I am genuinely shocked to hear that, and I'm sorry you fell foul to that. There would be absolutely no reason to start examining unrelated locks for a public liability injury claim. Curious who it may have been, or which firm. it's a very small industry.

@rockhopper

I can't honestly remember who the insurance company was - its a few years ago now. The loss adjuster was an independent guy.

We had a friend's brother (RIP Paul) who was high up in the insurance world who helped us and a solicitor in London. Still cost us a few £k to resolve. The issue was we still had a shop and stock to insure which occurred increased premiums.

There would be absolutely no reason to start examining unrelated locks

It is not uncommon. See my experience up there..... loss adjustor was examining door locks whilst I was pointing at the boarded up kitchen window and the hammer I had found in the garden under a bush a few days later. Front door lock had bugger all to do with how they got in

Presumably my lock did match the policy or I might have had a similar battle

There would be absolutely no reason to start examining unrelated locks for a public liability injury claim.

DT78, a partial quote there. I specifically said that examining locks for a PL injury claim isn't needed.* If it is a break-in, then I would expect a domestic property adjuster to inspect the type of locks in the property, but then a decision subsequently made if it was material to the loss or not.

The loss adjusting industry is also governed by the Treating Customers Fairly Charter. Any reputable firm will have to sign up to it,

Where I worked this was front and centre, it absolutely wasn't the adjusters' role to decline cover willy-nilly and
before doping so it required escalated referral and then seek Insurers' consent before doing so.

*Caveat that, if it is a trespass injury for example, where the injured party gained access to a locked area then suffered injury, you may look at locks that were bypassed as evidence gathering.

@lunge - any progress?

Recently Mrs oldnick had to do a phone call lie detector test about our stolen car, she was so affronted that by the time I walked into the room she was cheerfully saying "No" to "Have you ever used a telephone?".

We still got paid out.

I find this hard to believe. The breach wasn’t material to the loss at all. Ombudsman would hang the Insurers out to dry for that.

Only if it goes to the ombudsman or court, a lot of people just give up or go along with what the insurance company says.

Nothing is set in stone, first of all the insurance company said the car wasn't covered as it wasn't on the drive, so we countered that as it was parked in the vehicle gateway to the garden it was a driveway - they folded. After that they made a low offer, we said we wanted more, they came up to what we wanted (market value).

My ex worked in insurance so I know how it works, if they aren't being fair then moan, bitch and threaten legal action. Also, some companies are better than average regarding paying out a claim, they weren't the cheapest though surprise surprise.

@8plusn8, went ok, thanks for asking.
The fella was pleasant enough and couldn’t really explain why he’d be sent for what he thought was a fairly clear cut claim.
I’m expecting news on the claim early next week. Fingers crossed it’s a sensible offer.

Cool good luck for a positive outcome.