Report Abuse

Report this review to the Review Centre Team

Here at Review Centre we work hard to make sure we are the best place on the internet for honest, unbiased consumer reviews - we are grateful for your help in keeping us that way!


Why are you reporting this review?

If you represent this business why not claim your page by creating a Free Business Account where you will receive improved review monitoring functionality.


“The double whammy”

Written on: 19/09/2021 by EddieMcGraw (1 review written)

Ombudsman said they can't dictate how Aviva run their business. Aviva used a false report in order to decline my claim. That's nothing to do with dictating to a company that's being complicit the report was never removed for me its a company maintaining a lie as they had ample time to remove the report. The appointed assessor by Aviva conducted a fake survey he stated there was no visible damage in need of repair he never evidenced the end of the house where the damage was clear this was the reason for my complaint.
Ombudsman's view on these companies were I was unhappy with the assessor's report and they don't know why Aviva didn't change there report.
Ombudsman's reason for not upholding my claim, the report stated in order to uphold the claim we must answer yes to these three conditions.
1,was there a storm at the time. Yes.
2,was the damage consistent with storm damage. Yes.
3,was the storm the main cause of the damage. Blank.
Ombudsman went on to say they think the damage may have been caused over time. My claim was declined because of a thought no reason no evidence.
It's all wrong if there are bad practices in order to decline a claim the claim should be upheld. For me making bland comments about these practices means complicity by the ombudsman. To decline a claim on a thought needs investigation. The system looks corrupt there is no reason why my claim was not upheld. I believe the Ombudsman's report would've stand scrutiny.

Was this review helpful? 0 0