Discrimination? Help please!

[Chrisgti6]

Right, you may have seen my recent post, if not basically what has happened is a neighbour hit my wife's car. Blame has been accepted by his insurance company and the car was collected today.

The problem we are currently having is around a hire car whilst hers is being repaired. Due to her having a stroke just over a year ago (aged 28 ffs) she now can only drive one handed. This means she has to have an auto car, a spinner on the steering wheel and an electronic keypad to control the lights, wipers, indicators etc. her licence has specific codes stating she has to have these.

When we reported the claim, Churchill said they could sort a hire car through Enterprise, enterprise called and said yes, they can. It all started to go wrong yesterday when enterprise called saying it will be Friday before a car will be available. 2 days without a car isn't the end of the world although inconvenient. Now today they have called to say they will only provide a car with a spinner and extended indicator stalks.

She cannot drive this car, so we have told them it is not good enough. We've spoken to Churchill again, and the answer I got was basically 'tough' so I have raised a complaint and am expecting a call back from them.

Am I right in thinking this is some sort of discrimination? We are pretty much being told she can't have a hire car because she has mobility problems?

anyone had this sort of thing before?

 

[Mentalpen]

As far as I'm aware they only have to try and accommodate the disabled not cater for every need. Sorry if that sounds harsh it's not meant to.

I doubt they will have the exact car you need as everyone needs different equipment. Wife's mum has MS for example and would not need everything your wife does but some of it + other things like hand controls for gas etc.

Not the best but have you thought about taxis at there expense?

 

[Chrisgti6]

As far as I'm aware they only have to try and accommodate the disabled not cater for every need. Sorry if that sounds harsh it's not meant to.

I doubt they will have the exact car you need as everyone needs different equipment. Wife's mum has MS for example and would not need everything your wife does but some of it + other things like hand controls for gas etc.

Not the best but have you thought about taxis at there expense?

It's not 'cater for every need' if the DVLA have stated she must have these modifications. It's like a person with an auto licence being given a manual car, whilst they would be able to drive it, legally they wouldn't. My wife could drive the car they have said they can supply, however legally she can't.

The modifications are declared on the insurance policy, so as far as I am concerned they should be helping us. Taxis will be my next question to them.

I've found plenty of specialist hire companies that have cars she could drive, so it's not like they don't exist.

 

[Mentalpen]

I'm not arguing or disagreeing with you but at the same time imo they are not discriminating against your lass. If there are specialist company's that can supply the car she needs then tell your insurance company.

I am simply says to discriminate imo would mean they don't have any or try to give any vehicle based round a disabled driver.

They do but just not to the exact requirements your lass needs.

 

[Jburgess455]

^^ as said above its not discrimination. Its poor customer service! They should be going out of their way to help you with this situation!

 

[Chrisgti6]

The reason I have referred to it being discrimination is becuase if she were able bodied, they would have provided a car, but as she isn't they 'can't'.

I've been reading the small print, and it does say that in the event they can't provide a car they will cover travel costs up to £15 per day. £15 a day? that won't even cover taxi fare to work and back, let alone all her physio appointments etc.

 

[Willis]

Keep receipts for everything and claim it against the other persons insurance. It's upto your insurance to provide the most adequate car they can (which to be fair it sounds like they have tried although your frustration is completely understandable), any claims you make for financial loss resulting from the accident is not payable by your insurance company if the other party is at fault anyway. Your insurer should be able to help you to pursue a claim of financial loss for travel expenses against the other insurance company.

Failing that, take the other party through small claims court, will only cost you around £50 to issue against them and then the panel there will decide if your claim is reasonable and award or not award accordingly. However, that has the potential to cause a fall out with the other party so I'd only do that as a very last resort really...

 

[X82]

The reason I have referred to it being discrimination is becuase if she were able bodied, they would have provided a car, but as she isn't they 'can't'.

Sorry mate but that's not at all discrimination. I think you're too quick to jump on the victim wagon, much like when people like to pull the race card when in fact the situation is nothing to do with race, or disability, or beliefs et cetera.

The difference between discrimination and being just plain unhelpful is:
-Can't = unhelpful
-Won't (because of a prejudice) = discrimination, like not giving someone a job based on their background or name.

It's a case of bad customer service, if they don't have a suitably equipped car to offer then they should be helping you find an alternative, instead of "tough".

Speak to your insurance and explain that the hire company is unable to provide a suitably equipped car, and to find a company that can.

 

[Chrisgti6]

Sorry mate but that's not at all discrimination. I think you're too quick to jump on the victim wagon, much like when people like to pull the race card when in fact the situation is nothing to do with race, or disability, or beliefs et cetera.

The difference between discrimination and being just plain unhelpful is:
-Can't = unhelpful
-Won't (because of a prejudice) = discrimination, like not giving someone a job based on their background or name.

It's a case of bad customer service, if they don't have a suitably equipped car to offer then they should be helping you find an alternative, instead of "tough".

Speak to your insurance and explain that the hire company is unable to provide a suitably equipped car, and to find a company that can.

I have, it was Churchill (our insurance company) that have said there is nothing they can do. They could if they chose to, there are a number of companies that hire cars with the appropriate modifications.

You need to think about what you are typing before posting in future, i'm not jumping on the 'victim' wagon at all. Fingers crossed you never have to go through something similar as you may well feel the same as we do.

 

[Robo_#1]

Hmmm, its a tricky one this. On the one hand it seems unfair (and verging on discrimination) that they provide reduced mobility vehicles for people with certain requirements but not to others.

On the other hand (and I genuinely mean this in the nicest possible way) you should maybe have checked that in the event of an accident they could provide a suitable car for your wife when you took out the policy and signed the agreement. Saying that the modifications are declared and that your policy tells you they will provide a car does not mean that it will be of equal specification (unless its stated), you presumed that (as most would, myself included). In the world of insurance when you presume 2+2 =4 its unfortunately not always the case.

That said, this is where the companies level of customer service comes in to play. Common decency would suggest they should do all they can to keep your wife on the road and you as their customer happy (besides, they can claim this back from the third party so it's not going to cost them). It's just sh!t that in this instance Churchill don't seem to want to give you that level of care. I would suggest speaking to someone as high up as possible and asking how you lodge a formal complaint. There *could* be grounds for you to demand that they havent kept their end of the agreement, however this is difficult to prove and as I wrote above may not be fully specified in your policy wording.

Wishing you all the best of luck,

Rob

 

[X82]

You need to think about what you are typing before posting in future, i'm not jumping on the 'victim' wagon at all.

I have thoroughly thought about it. I don't like seeing someone use a deeply unfortunate situation as a spiteful weapon to throw back at someone. A disability is not a bargaining chip.

Your wife has her needs, if your insurance company is being unhelpful and can't meet basic needs then you'll have to put the pressure on them.

Threaten to take it further, is it the motor insurers bureau that you can complain to? I can't remember.

Fingers crossed you never have to go through something similar as you may well feel the same as we do.

How do you know I haven't?

 

[iAndy]

Do they provide an allowance for a hire car? I've seen the crazy bills hire companies present to insurance companies, they ain't shy at hitting them with a cost. We had a Range Rover hit and the insurance provided a very nice Porsche Cayenne as a hire vehicle as it was in their same band but having seen the bill for it, I would of rather of sorted a car myself and billed them. Would of kept the cost of claim down!

If they will let you source your own car and then bill them I can't see that being unfair at all. As long as you didn't do anything daft like hire a ferrari then you would take a bit of the hassle away from them. Plus you would get a car that was actually of use to you

 

[Mentalpen]

I've been reading the small print, and it does say that in the event they can't provide a car they will cover travel costs up to £15 per day. £15 a day? that won't even cover taxi fare to work and back, let alone all her physio appointments etc.

But you are not claiming on your insurance so they are not covering the cost.

Ring and ask them to claim it back.

 

[Chrisgti6]

How do you know I haven't?

If you had, i'm sure you would have a different take on it. Anyway, i'm not having an argument about it, I still think the situation is wrong. I can understand that it takes time to source cars as specialist as we require, but to not offer anything in the mean time is not on. I could understand if we were at fault, but we aren't.

Had a development today, the comlpaints team called my wife (even though i'd asked them to call me) and she asked the person who called to ring me. He refused, his actual words were 'Why can't you deal with it?'

WTF? what has it got to do with him why she can't deal with it? I've the one they have dealt with from day one, they've never spoken to my wife apart from for her to tell them I can deal with it for her on her behalf.

I've demanded the car be returned to us, and we will deal with this an alternative way. I'm going to speak to an accident management company called Kindertons later today. They dealt with a none fault claim I had a few years ago and were very helpful and professional throughout.

I'll keep you posted.

 

[nicknameless]

When you have the breathing space I would make a formal complaint about the customer service you've received from Churchill and see how they resolve that, and whether it's to your satisfaction or not. Keep a record of everything - times, dates, names of people you have spoken to and their positions.

If Churchill do not resolve that to your satisfaction then you can try the financial ombudsman service, but I believe you have to exhaust the company's complaints procedures first before going down this avenue.

As to their obligations, as already stated, I would imagine those are covered by T & Cs of your insurance policy, although there may be some ambiguity or interpretation of these needed.

Best of luck with it. Sounds extremely stressful and I totally understand you needing to fight your and your wife's corner.

 

[Mentalpen]

'Why can't you deal with it?'

Seriously mate, that is bang out of order.

try emailing Paul.Geddes@directlinegroup.co.uk as he is the MD of the group :thumbsup:

 

[Paddy_R]

A friend on mine has a VW Scricco and is disabled (numerious illnesses and ailments) and the car is adapted for him. When his VW need to go in for warrenty work all VW could supply was a Vauxhall Astra estate automatic (again from Enterprise). Now my friend needs things like lightened steering and hand controls but it was a simple no can do from VW and he was left with the auto Vauxhall which left him very tired after even a short journey. No amount of complaints from him changed their decision on the courtesy car.

Have you told you insurance company about these other specialist hire companies? It may help.

To add insult to it they were only supposed to have is car 5 days but had it near 3 weeks and when it was returned they had removed his lightened steering when they were trying to fix an issue with the steering. He was not a happy chappy.

I hope you and your wife get sorted asap.