Carole Nash/Markerstudy

Paul G (BHT)

Creator
Mod Squad
Joined
Jan 30, 2001
Messages
20,985
Solutions
1
Reaction score
1,067
Location
Asgard
Spent 1hr 4 minutes on the phone this morning to insure a new bike..... fek me how difficult can it be :eek

Got the documents through and noticed this on one of the pages:-
Endorsements Applicable
E726 Security - Thatcham Category 1 Immobiliser
We will not provide any cover under Section 2 of the policy (i.e. any claim for loss or damage by theft or attempted theft of the insured vehicle) unless we have proof that it is fitted with a factory fitted Thatcham Category 1 immobiliser or it has a Thatcham Category 1 immobiliser fitted by an insurer approved installer and that the immobiliser is on and working whenever the insured vehicle is left.

So I called them back and explained I don't have, and never claimed I had, a Thatcham Category 1 Immobiliser fitted to the bike(s) and was concerned at this endorsement inclusion.
A 43 minute call then took place where Carole Nash claim that only applies if I HAD told them I had the mobiliser fitted. Again I expressed my concerns and said that isn't what it says on the policy documents.
I asked them if they could clarify that in writing and after a lot of "please hold the line" scenarios they say they can not do so.... by this time I was not a happy chappie so decided to leave it at that :blast

A question, can someone here who is covered by Carole Nash/Markerstudy check their policy documents and tell me if this is on theirs too? It was on the top of page 8 titled Endorsements Applicable of the 24 page PDF policy document.
 
Seems a lot of the agents use markerstudy as i bumped into them when getting quotes and iirc i was told
i would have to jump through the security hoops you mentioned at which point i declined to do so and backed away.
Eventually got insured by ageas via Bemoto; no demands were made as to security measures of the Thatcham type.
 
I've moved to RH (who have posted on here) after being with CN for years and years.

Much better service over the phone. Better experience altogether. And half the price, for me.
 
Was the "endorsements applicable" part of the Schedule of Insurance?

Sometimes you get a list of multiple endorsements with a small note to say, check schedule to see which apply. The schedule just has a list of E codes to show those applicable to your policy.
 
How old is your bike? Don't bikes have immobilisers fitted as standard, just like cars do?
 
also, if unhappy, you can cancel the policy under the cooling off rules
 
How old is your bike? Don't bikes have immobilisers fitted as standard, just like cars do?

I have just checked, not all makes have been Thatcham approved. The 4 main Japanese firms plus Triumph & Ducati have this approval. No sign of approval for BMW, KTM, Harley or any of the European scooter brands. Presumably they get an equivalent local or EU certificate.

As every vehicle made after a certain date has to have an immobiliser with coded keys fitted in the factory you have to wonder why Markerstudy has to have such an endorsement in the policy.
 
If, it is a condition of the policy, it is enforceable, as you don't have it, should you make a claim; you'll be fucked.

Special Engineering phrase.

An option, is to call them back and intimate that you are making a Subject Access Request under GDPR. This can now be done orally (despite them probably claiming you have to write in), and as you've jumped through their security hoops, you've proved you're you, otherwise they shouldn't be talking with you !

Specifically, ask for any and all information held and processed, also telephone call recordings too. This will prove what you said, then go to Ageas and tell of misselling.

Footman James, forgot about 7 pages and £10K, of mods, to my gsa, accordingly Ageas never knew they were insuring a non standard bike. I'm almost 1/3rd of a year down the line on a claim. If they, as my broker, had done their job properly none of this crap would be happening.

Easy to be wise after the event.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
If, it is a condition of the policy, it is enforceable, as you don't have it, should you make a claim; you'll be fucked.

Special Engineering phrase.

An option, is to call them back and intimate that you are making a Subject Access Request under GDPR. This can now be done orally (despite them probably claiming you have to write in), and as you've jumped through their security hoops, you've proved you're you, otherwise they shouldn't be talking with you !

Specifically, ask for any and all information held and processed, also telephone call recordings too. This will prove what you said, then go to Ageas and tell of misselling.

Footman James, forgot about 7 pages and £10K, of mods, to my gsa, accordingly Ageas never knew they were insuring a non standard bike. I'm almost 1/3rd of a year down the line on a claim. If they, as my broker, had done their job properly none of this crap would be happening.

Easy to be wise after the event.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

According to the OP the insurance is with Markerstudy not Ageas.
 
my friend had a similar issue with an immobiliser. It wasn't Carole Nash ,think it was Bennets. He did what the OP had done and read through the policy in detail...(not many of us do that i bet.) there was something mentioned in it that he didn't have ,think it was an thatcham approved alarm ,The BMW isn't ! so he also called them back stating he never said the alarm was thatcher approved. He cancelled the insurance as they had sold him a False policy. after much humming and arr-ing, they refunded him . He went elsewhere
 
Was the "endorsements applicable" part of the Schedule of Insurance?

Sometimes you get a list of multiple endorsements with a small note to say, check schedule to see which apply. The schedule just has a list of E codes to show those applicable to your policy.

This is the question the OP needs to answer.

I have a policy with a similar endorsement, but relating to a tracker, as opposed to an alarm. The specific endorsement only applies to one of the bikes on the schedule, being the bike I told the underwriter was fitted with a tracker, not to any other of the bikes listed.
 
Was the "endorsements applicable" part of the Schedule of Insurance?

Sometimes you get a list of multiple endorsements with a small note to say, check schedule to see which apply. The schedule just has a list of E codes to show those applicable to your policy.

This is the question the OP needs to answer.

There are two bikes on the policy each has their own Endorsements Applicable section.

They both have:-
E728 Excluding Theft When Not Garaged
We will not pay any claim under Section 2 for loss or damage by theft or attempted theft when the insured motorcycle is parked at the Insured's permanent place of residence and/or the declared garaging address, unless the motorcycle is kept in a properly constructed and locked garage.
I have no problem with this one.

But the bike with the greater value has:-
E726 Security - Thatcham Category 1 Immobiliser
We will not provide any cover under Section 2 of the policy (i.e. any claim for loss or damage by theft or attempted theft of the insured vehicle) unless we have proof that it is fitted with a factory fitted Thatcham Category 1 immobiliser or it has a Thatcham Category 1 immobiliser fitted by an insurer approved installer and that the immobiliser is on and working whenever the insured vehicle is left.

As mentioned in my original post my concern is I only have their word that this only applies IF I had told them it has one and it turns out it hasn't, which I did not.

The final words of the original phone call when taking out the policy were "Please read your policy documents carefully" It seems once I had done so and expressed my concern they simply dismissed it. It is their reluctance to clarify this in writing that concerns me.

I will call them on Thursday and get this sorted or cancel the policy.
 
There are two bikes on the policy each has their own Endorsements Applicable section.

They both have:-

I have no problem with this one.

But the bike with the greater value has:-


As mentioned in my original post my concern is I only have their word that this only applies IF I had told them it has one and it turns out it hasn't, which I did not.

The final words of the original phone call when taking out the policy were "Please read your policy documents carefully" It seems once I had done so and expressed my concern they simply dismissed it. It is their reluctance to clarify this in writing that concerns me.

I will call them on Thursday and get this sorted or cancel the policy.
Sadly, it is concerning. Once they have your money it is fuckoffsville.

Doing a SAR tends to focus minds; there is now no dispute about was/was not said.


BMW haven't submitted any alarms, or immobilisers for testing by Thatcham, so no bike has a Cat 1 system as standard. My S1000rr sport has BMW tracker system, insurer's weren't interested either way.

I have had to fit Cat 1 and trackers to cars, to get insurance.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
Write to them with your concerns c/o their Compliance Officer. Ask for written confirmation/ clarification re your concerns. Tell them if no reply within X working days, you will cancel the policy as is your right under financial services cooling off rules.

Involving the compliance officer usually sets the clock running re their procedures under the FSA / Ombudsman.
 
What does RH stand for anyone?
I've moved to RH (who have posted on here) after being with CN for years and years.

Much better service over the phone. Better experience altogether. And half the price, for me.
 
Spent 1hr 4 minutes on the phone this morning to insure a new bike..... fek me how difficult can it be :eek

Got the documents through and noticed this on one of the pages:-


So I called them back and explained I don't have, and never claimed I had, a Thatcham Category 1 Immobiliser fitted to the bike(s) and was concerned at this endorsement inclusion.
A 43 minute call then took place where Carole Nash claim that only applies if I HAD told them I had the mobiliser fitted. Again I expressed my concerns and said that isn't what it says on the policy documents.
I asked them if they could clarify that in writing and after a lot of "please hold the line" scenarios they say they can not do so.... by this time I was not a happy chappie so decided to leave it at that :blast

A question, can someone here who is covered by Carole Nash/Markerstudy check their policy documents and tell me if this is on theirs too? It was on the top of page 8 titled Endorsements Applicable of the 24 page PDF policy document.

I wouldn’t bother with the phone line, drop the Help Team a line, help@carolenash.com detailing your concern at the security requirement. They WILL write back with the definitive position.

My experience is that whilst the phone guys can be lacking, the Help Team, operate on a more helpful & professional level.
 
I’m insured with Zeneth/Markerstudy. After my accident 16/12/18 (posted on here) they were very unhelpful. I don’t want to go into anything more specific as I’m still Insured with them for another few months. A time line accident 16/12. Bike brought to dealers 17/12 3rd party examines bike 18/12 and agrees estimate with dealer. Tried without success to contact markerstudy 16/17/19 of December. Finally spoke and gave statements on the 20th. About 1 hour phone call. Then another call because I was trough to wrong department. Were the trying to trip me up? It took 5 weeks to sort out them agreeing estimate. I have comprehensive insurance. They kept insting that this is standard industrial norms. Eventually got bike fixed. Duffy’s has given me a loan bike for the entire time without charge. I would have been in shit for transportation otherwise. Alls well now as 3rd party have accepted liability. I will never go near them again nor would I recommend them to anyone. All they do is talk down to you and give you the runaround. The 4 days it initially took to talk to them was passed off as 48 hours. Never again. JJH
 
If i was to make the assumption that the new bike to be insured was a GS, then it would fail the test statement immidiatley.

The statement reads " ...is on and working whenever the insured vehicle is left. "

The handbook states that the Alarm will turn off after 7-10 days of non bike use to protect the battery

So at best you ony have insurance for a maximum period of 10 days of non use, after that you have no alarm, and no insurance lol
 


Back
Top Bottom