Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 6th Mar 17, 8:45 PM
    • 92Posts
    • 60Thanks
    Bath cube
    Insurer being awkward about claim
    • #1
    • 6th Mar 17, 8:45 PM
    Insurer being awkward about claim 6th Mar 17 at 8:45 PM
    The circumstances regarding this are quite a long story so I will keep it short and to the point as much as I can. Last june I was assaulted to the extent I received blows to my head and was knocked unconscious. When I cane around I summoned immediate medical attention by way of calling for a ambulance. Due to having been an assault the police were requested to attend with the ambulance staff. I was transfered to hospital and confirmed as having concussion and was kept there until the following afternoon. Whlist I was at hospital my partner returned home and realised I was not home it was late on a weekend night. He noticed my laptop charger was plugged in and my case on the sofa but no laptop there. He went upstairs into our bedroom and noticed our chest of drawers disturbed and two other laptops had gone. Also my small jewelery box was on the floor at the side of my dressing table empty. A neighbour knocked to tell him I had been taken away by ambulance and the police has asked some neighbours had they seen or heard anything
    When he got to the hospital he told me about the missing things and we both concluded the person who assaulted me took them whilst I was unconscious. We reported the theft the following day by phone to the police who had already logged the assault the previous night and they gave us a crime reference number. We then got in touch with our insurers to put forward a claim. Some weeks later the police told us someone had come forward with information regarding the attacker and had taken them in for questioning. Our insurer sent a independent assessor to see us regarding the claim. We have been told our claim wI'll only be paid out if they can retrieve the costs back from the attacker. Is this right.
Page 2
    • Blibble
    • By Blibble 13th Mar 17, 8:13 AM
    • 155 Posts
    • 66 Thanks
    Blibble
    I don't wish to reveal who my insurer is thanks.
    Originally posted by Bath cube
    What do you think we're going to do - call them up and ask for details of "bath cube's" claim?

    But as I say again and I'm fed up with repeating myself they have said f hinds vouchers to the value of four thousand have been offered.
    Originally posted by Bath cube
    Nobody is asking you to repeat yourself; we're trying to establish why 4k worth of vouchers has been offered but as you keep repeating yourself we're going round in circles.


    We understand you might not fully understand your policy & want help navigating an insurance claim - that's perfectly natural. So actually let folk do some helping.
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 13th Mar 17, 8:59 AM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    Sorry if I have come across as rude to some but I have never made a theft claim before and it's blooming stressful. Yes my insurer upon taking out the policy with them 6 years ago did ask if I had any valuables worth over two thousand pounds which were my wedding and engagement rings. My insurer then listed them separately on the policy but they have never informed me in writing or otherwise of the upper limit they will pay for each item in the event of a claim. I haven't purchased any jewellery for a long time but as I say a quick look at most high street jewellers sites and the average is around six to seven thousand for a similar solitaire ring. I don't expect my insurer to give me the equivalent of a two or three carat for example so it's not like I'm trying to get a Mercedes when I only had a ford fiesta in the first place so to speak. I have not specified the earrings or any other item of jewellery to them simply because they were not purchased for over two thousand pounds compared to my wedding jewels. So it's not as though I am trying to rip my insurers off I just want a fair settlement to be able to buy a equivalent replacement of the stolen items. I have said that I'm happy to settle the claim with vouchers or a card so I can just go into a few stores and then choose my replacements. But I don't see why I should be limited to a single store. Surely insurance companies are able to access vouchers or cards that can be redeemed at a variety of jewellers instead of just one store.
    • ALIBOBSY
    • By ALIBOBSY 13th Mar 17, 10:25 AM
    • 4,391 Posts
    • 16,328 Thanks
    ALIBOBSY
    F. Hinds are a well established, old company and highly likely to have better quality jewellelry than h. samual et al. BUT the insurance company may be trying to get away with paying less to settle, that's what they all do for all types of claims.

    I would look if there is a hinds close to you and pop in, ask them what a ring similar to what you had would cost.

    Also is the 4k just for the ring? Also have you allowed for any excess you will need to pay?

    Ali x
    "Overthinking every little thing
    Acknowledge the bell you cant unring"
    • paddyandstumpy
    • By paddyandstumpy 13th Mar 17, 11:57 AM
    • 740 Posts
    • 294 Thanks
    paddyandstumpy
    If they specified the items, what value did they specify them for?
    It's your responsibility to ensure the values are accurate.

    If they didn't specify them then you will only have £2k cover per item.
    • rs65
    • By rs65 13th Mar 17, 6:47 PM
    • 5,168 Posts
    • 2,453 Thanks
    rs65
    Yes my insurer upon taking out the policy with them 6 years ago did ask if I had any valuables worth over two thousand pounds which were my wedding and engagement rings. My insurer then listed them separately on the policy but they have never informed me in writing or otherwise of the upper limit they will pay for each item in the event of a claim.
    Originally posted by Bath cube
    If they are listed on the policy, are you sure they don't have a value (sum insured) against them?
    • Blibble
    • By Blibble 13th Mar 17, 6:50 PM
    • 155 Posts
    • 66 Thanks
    Blibble
    If the insurer has listed them separately on the policy then it sounds like they've been specified which is good news. You're first bet would be to ask the insurer what the wedding and engagement rings are specified for, as this will go a long way to establishing the correct valuation of the claim.

    I would also ask the insurer to provide catalogue references / weblinks etc. for the like-for-like replacements. This will be your best bet for refuting their offer if you're unhappy - you can't refute it if you don't know how they've not come to that figure!

    So get a breakdown of the 4k settlement and take it from there.

    The insurer may have alternative suppliers with which you could use a voucher, or it may be just F. Hinds - it's always worth asking. In my opinion F. Hinds do a decent job, but everyone's different. If they only offer a voucher scheme for F. Hinds & you're not keen, you're best bet would be to ask for the cash. This will be a slightly reduced figure than the voucher value (as the insurer gets a discount through their supplier, i.e., F. Hinds) however gives you a load more freedom. There's no real argument against it, regrettably; the policy will state somewhere that the insurer may use their own appointed supplier and it's up to them what settlement options / routes to offer.
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 13th Mar 17, 7:08 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    I phoned a local branch of f hinds not long ago. They did say that they have different ranges of diamond rings and it is the quality of the stone eg the clarity and if the cut is excellent which determines the price. They said a ring similar to the one I had in the same metal and carat weight ranges from three to six and a half thousand pounds with the colour and clarity of the stones determing the price. The same applies to my wedding band and earrings. The manager did tell me that she would be very surprised if the insurer gave me vouchers for a specific store as she did say most customers going through their insurance are given a gemcheck card with the agreed amount loaded onto the card. This card can be used to purchase items at nearly every chain of high street jewellers and I won't have to spend the amount all in one go eg I could buy my replacement rings from hinds then go to say leslie davies at another time and buy the earrings from there if I wanted to. This lady was m
    • chocaholics
    • By chocaholics 15th Mar 17, 6:56 PM
    • 325 Posts
    • 3,628 Thanks
    chocaholics
    Evening all, have been reading with interest because I am in a similar situation myself. I lost my late Mums 2 diamond rings, but only one was mentioned on my insurance and at a lesser value than the actual valuation because I thought I had lost the certificate for it. So I put the value at £1500 although I know it was valued at £1995 30 years ago as I fully intended to get a proper valuation. This is because the insurance states anything above £1500 must be mentioned separately.I subsequently found the valuation later. Unfortunately although it has been valued by the assessors at £3200 the insurers are only paying me £1500 before deduction of the excess. The other ring I didnt mention as I assumed it was worth less than £1500 which was stupid of me as I can now see replacements for similar 2 rings amounts to more than £5000. For this ring I have been offered £950 before excess and payment will be in vouchers which I have to use in H Samuel or Ernest Jones. Now upon looking at both these websites I can see that I wont even be able to buy 1 decent ring for this feeble amount of money. I have refused to accept these valuations so far but they seem immoveable so I will try the onbudsman and hope to get a more sympathetic ear. If they gave me cash I would be happy to replace them with 2 second hand rings as that is the only way to get something like the values I think.
    Does anyone think the ombudsman would be sympathetic in this case.
    TIA
    Last edited by chocaholics; 15-03-2017 at 7:00 PM.
    • Blibble
    • By Blibble 15th Mar 17, 7:40 PM
    • 155 Posts
    • 66 Thanks
    Blibble
    So I put the value at £1500 although I know it was valued at £1995 30 years ago
    Originally posted by chocaholics
    Oops ...

    The other ring I didnt mention as I assumed it was worth less than £1500 which was stupid of me as I can now see replacements for similar 2 rings amounts to more than £5000.
    Originally posted by chocaholics
    Oh dear ...

    Does anyone think the ombudsman would be sympathetic in this case.
    Originally posted by chocaholics
    Nope.

    It's worth asking your insurer to confirm which items they have seen which are a like-for-like match to the ones which were lost / stolen, however it would have been up to you to ensure that the valuations on the policy were up to date I'm afraid.

    It's your job to make sure you're adequately covered for the items you wish to insure, not your insurer's job.
    • chocaholics
    • By chocaholics 15th Mar 17, 10:48 PM
    • 325 Posts
    • 3,628 Thanks
    chocaholics
    Oops ...



    Oh dear ...



    Nope.

    It's worth asking your insurer to confirm which items they have seen which are a like-for-like match to the ones which were lost / stolen, however it would have been up to you to ensure that the valuations on the policy were up to date I'm afraid.

    It's your job to make sure you're adequately covered for the items you wish to insure, not your insurer's job.
    Originally posted by Blibble
    Thanks but they are meant to be replacement value but I wont get even one ring with what they are offering, and yes I was very careless but had no idea that the value would have gone up so much. My own fault as you said.
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 15th Mar 17, 11:18 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    I'm really sorry to hear that chocoholic. Yes I think you should contact the ombudsman you have been treated terribly. My policy states new for old on replacements which includes jewellery. A ring which cost almost three thousand twenty years for example would be impossible to replace on a like for like basis today for the original purchase price. If I was only given the original purchase price and had to go to say ernest jones I would be very lucky if I got a quarter carat stone in white gold. I'm told that my insurer must provide enough so that I can buy a ring of the same stone carat and metal purity which would be impossible if I only received the original putchase cost less my excess too. I don't want to disclose who my insurer is on here because I'm concerned they could use it against me. If you bought a house for fifty thousand twenty years ago you certainly couldn't now and it's the same for jewellery too.
    • Pollycat
    • By Pollycat 16th Mar 17, 8:09 AM
    • 17,359 Posts
    • 44,229 Thanks
    Pollycat
    I'm really sorry to hear that chocoholic. Yes I think you should contact the ombudsman you have been treated terribly. My policy states new for old on replacements which includes jewellery. A ring which cost almost three thousand twenty years for example would be impossible to replace on a like for like basis today for the original purchase price. If I was only given the original purchase price and had to go to say ernest jones I would be very lucky if I got a quarter carat stone in white gold. I'm told that my insurer must provide enough so that I can buy a ring of the same stone carat and metal purity which would be impossible if I only received the original putchase cost less my excess too. I don't want to disclose who my insurer is on here because I'm concerned they could use it against me. If you bought a house for fifty thousand twenty years ago you certainly couldn't now and it's the same for jewellery too.
    Originally posted by Bath cube
    The point of insurance for specific valuable items e.g. jewellery is that you must insure them for an appropriate amount.
    In chocaholic's situation, she insured a ring that had an insurance value of £1995 30 years ago at £1500! That's three-quarters of a 30 year old valuation!

    I can't see the ombudsman being amenable to rule in her favour when she had valued the ring at £1500 and that's what the insurance are willing to pay out (less any excess).

    It's worth asking your insurer to confirm which items they have seen which are a like-for-like match to the ones which were lost / stolen, however it would have been up to you to ensure that the valuations on the policy were up to date I'm afraid.

    It's your job to make sure you're adequately covered for the items you wish to insure, not your insurer's job.
    Originally posted by Blibble
    This ^^^^

    FWIW, I think it's wrong (I'm not saying it's not within their rights) for your insurer to insist you buy a replacement from a specific jeweller.

    I lost my engagement ring over 30 years ago, it was an antique solitaire and was adequately insured.
    IIRC, I was told to find a ring that I wanted and the insurers would arrange payment.

    Question to Bath cube:
    Just curious - did the valuation specify the colour, carat and clarity of your ring?
    • Blibble
    • By Blibble 16th Mar 17, 9:19 AM
    • 155 Posts
    • 66 Thanks
    Blibble
    I'm told that my insurer must provide enough so that I can buy a ring of the same stone carat and metal purity which would be impossible if I only received the original putchase cost less my excess too.
    Originally posted by Bath cube
    Your insurer must provide enough so that you are in the same position as you were pre-loss WITHIN YOUR POLICY LIMITS. If I could put that in multi-coloured 50pt font with fireworks coming off it that still wouldn't be enough emphasis.

    Your insurance policy is a contract between yourself & your insurer for how the insurer will indemnify you (i.e., put you back in the same position should an insurable event occur). You are signing this contract & agreeing to it; it is up to you to ensure that this contract is suitable for your needs if you should ever need to claim. That's why you're always given 14 days to cancel it at no charge in case you find it not to be suitable.

    FoS is a wonderful service which prioritises fairness above all else. Your insurer has acted perfectly fairly in this case I'm afraid.
    • Aretnap
    • By Aretnap 16th Mar 17, 10:47 AM
    • 2,682 Posts
    • 2,134 Thanks
    Aretnap
    See here

    http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/121/121-under-insurance.html#cs6

    And in particular read case study 121-6, at the bottom of the page, which seems rather similar to Chocaholic's case - and provided the insurer made clear to the customer that they needed to ensure the jewellery was insured for an adequate amount the Ombudsman would be unlikely to uphold a complaint.
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 16th Mar 17, 2:32 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    Chocoholic here is a contact number for the financial ombudsman 0800 027 4567. My claim has been ongoing for over nine months and I may well have to involve them myself. Wishing you well.
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 16th Mar 17, 2:35 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    Oops it's 0800 023 4567 not 027.
    • rs65
    • By rs65 16th Mar 17, 6:55 PM
    • 5,168 Posts
    • 2,453 Thanks
    rs65
    Thanks but they are meant to be replacement value but I wont get even one ring with what they are offering, and yes I was very careless but had no idea that the value would have gone up so much. My own fault as you said.
    Originally posted by chocaholics
    The insurers aren't offering - they are paying you the amount you chose to insure them for (despite knowing it was too low). I wouldn't be optimistic about an ombudsman complaint.
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 19th Mar 17, 7:52 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    F hinds
    I called into a local branch of f hinds yesterday to see if I could determine the quality of some of their items compared to the ones which were stolen. The manager was quick to assure me that higher quality diamonds compared to those in the window display were available to order depending on the sum involved. I have taken that into consideration but I also noticed that the earrings which could be of a similar style to the ones I had were no where in comparison with them.mine where very high quality mappin and webb whilst the nearest in style from hinds were flimsy and the stones not as well cut and set.
    • Pollycat
    • By Pollycat 20th Mar 17, 8:30 AM
    • 17,359 Posts
    • 44,229 Thanks
    Pollycat
    Question to Bath cube:
    Just curious - did the valuation specify the colour, carat and clarity of your ring?
    Originally posted by Pollycat
    Did it?.....
    • Bath cube
    • By Bath cube 20th Mar 17, 6:02 PM
    • 92 Posts
    • 60 Thanks
    Bath cube
    Polly cat no the valuation wasn't based on the three c's of my ring.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

160Posts Today

1,590Users online

Martin's Twitter