Typical example of bad administration (Legal & General)

Member Name: chateauferret

Product:	Legal & General
Date:	22/12/03 (123 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: None identified

Disadvantages: Good at losing documents, Communicates by telepathy, Reckons it doesn't make mistakes

Made a proposal to Legal and General for a new house (building and contents) because they did a deal for people buying from the builder, Bellway. Sent off all the bumpf, including copy mortgage valuation report.

After a month it because apparent that no monthly premia were being deducted and no response had been received, so asked why. Told that insurance had not been processed because mortgage valuation report had not been sent. Apparently I am clairvoyant, so should have known they needed to see this. Sent the document again.

Another six weeks or so went by and a letter turned up asking me "please to supply the following items of information", although no items were actually listed there. Letter wanted a response within (literally) two days of receipt, one of which was a Sunday. Phoned and asked what was now wanted; turned out that they still wanted the valuation report. Told them that this now had been sent twice and predictably they said "must've been lost in the post".

Since it had been sent twice, I stated that this particular lightning doesn't strike twice in the same place and that nothing else I had sent anyone had disappeared, therefore reasonable to conclude that Legal and General doesn't process its inbound mail. Added that if this was the trouble we were having with a proposal, what would happen in the event of a claim?

Direct Line then processed a proposal over the phone, undercut their premium by 20%, didn't require sight of the document, and wrote to me within six hours rather than six weeks.

Price is for buildings, £120,000 rebuild and £15,000 contents over a £150,000 detached house with owner-occupier and a lodger in Glasgow (G53).

Summary: