Settlement for 'sentimental' items? Advice please?

Paula_Leanne

I have had an ongoing claim since last summer's Floods. The final item(s) to be settled are some very old photographs. These were in a box on the floor in a cupboard, which flooded and subsequently ruined the photos.

These photos were written off my the Restoration company, I imagine as they were irreplaceable, and also due to the fact that it was outside of their expertise to restore them. They can be restored, as can the majority of most ruined photos.

Hence, the value I have claimed (although so far is very approximate) is the restoration value, which will be in the form of a quote from a reputable restoration expert.

My loss adjuster has has informed me that as the photos have no financial value, then I cannot claim anything - and has offered me a very small sum of money as a goodwill gesture, which he deems to be very 'fair' To be truthful, it will probably not even pay for 2 of the 40 or so photos that require restoration!

My policy is not detailed enough to explain my cover in the event of items such as these, so I was just wondering if anyone has any experience of this type of claim, and what the general view seems to be?

Should I dispute it? After all, do we not pay our insurance premiums to cover things such as this? Or, would sentimental items be viewed - in general - as all other items, in that if restoration value exceeds financial value = write off. In which case, the write off value of sentimental items such as photos = negligible?

Any help or advice would be appreciated?

Regards

raskazz

Sorry to hear about that. Household insurance policies cover financial value not sentimental value. If you think about it, any item in your home - and even your home itself - can have sentimental value, and it is impossible to measure sentimental value in monetary terms. On the face of it, it seems that your insurer is being fair in making a goodwill offer for the items.

sdooley

Oh I feel for you this is awful. It may not help but this is likely to depend on the terms of your insurance contract. My uncle and aunt were flooded out years ago and the insurers didn't believe the value of books they put in for - then they came down and saw their flooded library.

If there is more than say £500 at stake here, might be worth getting an insurance lawyer to give you advice on the contract, write a stroppy letter to make the insurance company jump if you do have the right to claim.

Paula_Leanne

Thanks for taking the time to reply, I appreciate it.

The point I was trying to make to the insurer, though, was that it is not sentimental value as such that I am trying to put on the photos, but the cost to restore them. Many items of 'sentimental value' cannot be restored, however thankfully in our case the photos can be. It just seems unfair that your insurance would not cover such an incident if it should arise.

I have gone back and requested the case be referred with a view to at least increasing the offer somewhat. I anticipate the cost being between £600-£1000 depending on the severity of the damage (£600 based on all photos being just minor restoration, and £1000 based on major).

Thanks again

raskazz

The problem is, though, that the basis of the contract is financial value, not sentimental value.

Where items are uneconomical to repair, you are entitled either to obtain a replacement under new-for-old cover, or market value where the item is either unavailable or irreplaceable. The decision on whether something is beyond economical repair is made in terms of cost of repair vs. financial value. As the financial value is basically nil, the photos are beyond economical repair, thus you are entitled to market value. The insurers aren't obliged to give you anything for the photos, so I wouldn't push them on it lest they withdraw the goodwill offer leaving you with nothing.

lisyloo

it is not sentimental value as such that I am trying to put on the photos, but the cost to restore them

I really do appreciate your situation but insurance policies value things in financial terms and if the cost to repair them exceeds the financial value then they are often written off.

It's a similar situation with cars.
I have a car worth virtually nothing. It's 18 years old and would be written off at the slightest damage. However it's very reliable and has not broken down for over 4 years.

In judging it's financial value the insurer would say about £200 but it's clearly wourth far more "on the road" than it is off.
So it's value as an reliable vehicle which may last a few more years is not represented by the £200, but that's the way it is.

I do understand your feelings about the situation but I also think that legally you won't have a leg to stand on with on, because I'm sure the insurer will have covered themselves for items "beyond economic repair".

Sorry, but that's the way I see it.

If I were being really harsh (which I don't want to be) then it could be said that you should have checked your policy before this happened.
I think that would be a very uncharitable thing to say, but it does have a tad of validity.
We are all responsible for checking we have covered our risks to the level we require.