burgalled, insurance company are asking for receipts of the items that were taken.

stolt

h, im asking this question for a work colleague. His house was broken into sunday night and they stole his car (using keys form within the house) they also filled the car up with goods from the house, cameras, wii, psp, that kind of thing. Police have been round for fingerprints etc and gave a crime number which the insurance company wantedbut they have asked him for receipts of the items that have been taken.Some he has some he hasnt. As i was saying to him its to stop frud for people just saying bits and bobs have come from the house when they didnt even own them. In this case he had a wii and got it as a gift but his parents didnt keep the receipt. Is there anything his parents can sign to confirm this or is it something that they wont cover because he has no proof.

stolt

Dan_Thomas wrote: »

That sounds like a bummer. Lots of insurance companies will ask for proof of purchases, even a bank statement, an online order confirmation, credit card statement, etc etc will quite often be acceptable.

I use a local insurance broker. They've advised that I try and keep reciepts for everything I buy, but also to take pictures of all of my rooms/equipment etc. It doesn't take long and adds a lot of credibility to any claim.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, eh?

yes i was saying the same thing this morning and thought i better shut up as its no good telling him what he should have done, plus to ad to that the door keys wer eon the car key fob so he had to have a locksmith round to change all the locks:mad: so £200 plus all the stuff that went missing yeah hes not a happy bunny. Like you say we have taken pictures of our stuff just to prove we had it in the room at some stage, I;m notorious for not keeping receipts but I do ave credit card statements and i nearly pay with everything with my card.

Oh well i'll break the news to him tomorrow.

mattymoo

Card and bank statements (for debit cards) are a big help. Also tell him to look for any Xmas / birthday party type photos that show the items in the background. Probably applies more if he has young children otherwise you probably wouldn't bother taking pics.

Finally, it is unlikely the thieves took everything associated with each item, i.e. the box, manuals, leads and so on. Some loss adjusters distrust empty boxes as proof of ownership but I suspect this is more the case when something else about a claim doesn't stack up.

[Deleted User]

It annoys me when insurance companies do this. I mean, I know they're trying to stop fraud etc but, honestly, who keeps all the receipts.

I'm sure I read somewhere though that its not a condition that you produce all receipts though. Its basically just the insurance company doing they're best to keep the cost of the claim down.

If it were me I'd claim for everything that got taken, regardless of whether I could prove it, and tell them 'sorry - no receipt'.

I reckon then, as long as you;re not blatantly taking the p*ss they'll take you're word for it.

stolt

Hi thanks for the last reply, he has chargers which were still in cupboards etc and in the sockets for the ipod and some tv screen portable thing he had so I guess that's a help.I think overall apart from the car there is probably 1000 worth of stuff max. I did joke that what with the credit crunch the insurance companoes will see a lot more fraud and are probably looking into his background to see if there are any problems moneywise. The mobile phone is covered under carphone warehouse policy so its just the wii and a few other gadgets that need sorting now. Oh and a burglar alarm, personally I have grown up with one and could never sleep at night without one being on!

dacouch

In my experience not all companies insist on receipts / proof of ownership for all items you are claiming for. The better companies tend to ask for prove for higher value items eg a watch or expensive television that they would normally expect you to retain a receipt or have some proof of ownership for. However if they are suspicious of the items you are claiming for its common for them to ask for receipts for the items they are suspicious of.


The best bet for your friend is to speak to the loss adjuster, explain his position and come to an agreement on what items the Loss Adjsuter wants proof of ownership for and what types of proof they will accept. You will probably find the Loss Adjuster will be able to explain things and come to an agreement your friend is happy with


Here is a case the Ombudsman has dealt with regarding proving ownership


75/08
insurer refuses claim for a lost designer watch because policyholder cannot provide any proof of ownership
Mr B made a claim under his contents policy for the cost of replacing his designer watch. He said he lost the watch while on a mountain-walking trip one weekend. As soon as he got home he reported the loss to the police and obtained a crime reference number.
His policy covered personal belongings in and away from his home. He told the insurer that the watch had been worth over £1,800. However, he was aware that his policy had a limit of £1,500 for single items. He had therefore managed to find and buy a replacement that was similar in style to the watch he had lost, but that only cost £1,450.
The insurer said it needed to establish his ownership of the lost watch before it could consider the claim. It asked to see the original receipt. Mr B said he did not have a receipt because the watch had been a gift. He thought it highly unlikely that the friend who gave him the watch would still have the receipt. In any event, he did not feel he could ask her about it.
When the insurer said it was unable to take matters further without the receipt, Mr B complained to us.
We looked in detail at the contents policy. Like many such policies, it included a section about the need for policyholders to provide proof of ownership when making a claim.
We reminded the insurer that possession of a receipt was not the only means of establishing ownership. If Mr B was unable to ask his friend for the receipt – or for a copy of her credit card statement showing the purchase of the watch – he might be able to produce the guarantee or the box the watch had come in. Or he might have a photograph that clearly showed him wearing the watch.
We contacted Mr B and asked if he could provide any such evidence. A few days later he wrote to tell us he was withdrawing his complaint and no longer wished to pursue the matter.

[Deleted User]

dacouch wrote: »

In my experience not all companies insist on receipts / proof of ownership for all items you are claiming for. The better companies tend to ask for prove for higher value items eg a watch or expensive television that they would normally expect you to retain a receipt or have some proof of ownership for. However if they are suspicious of the items you are claiming for its common for them to ask for receipts for the items they are suspicious of.


The best bet for your friend is to speak to the loss adjuster, explain his position and come to an agreement on what items the Loss Adjsuter wants proof of ownership for and what types of proof they will accept. You will probably find the Loss Adjuster will be able to explain things and come to an agreement your friend is happy with


Here is a case the Ombudsman has dealt with regarding proving ownership


75/08
insurer refuses claim for a lost designer watch because policyholder cannot provide any proof of ownership
Mr B made a claim under his contents policy for the cost of replacing his designer watch. He said he lost the watch while on a mountain-walking trip one weekend. As soon as he got home he reported the loss to the police and obtained a crime reference number.
His policy covered personal belongings in and away from his home. He told the insurer that the watch had been worth over £1,800. However, he was aware that his policy had a limit of £1,500 for single items. He had therefore managed to find and buy a replacement that was similar in style to the watch he had lost, but that only cost £1,450.
The insurer said it needed to establish his ownership of the lost watch before it could consider the claim. It asked to see the original receipt. Mr B said he did not have a receipt because the watch had been a gift. He thought it highly unlikely that the friend who gave him the watch would still have the receipt. In any event, he did not feel he could ask her about it.
When the insurer said it was unable to take matters further without the receipt, Mr B complained to us.
We looked in detail at the contents policy. Like many such policies, it included a section about the need for policyholders to provide proof of ownership when making a claim.
We reminded the insurer that possession of a receipt was not the only means of establishing ownership. If Mr B was unable to ask his friend for the receipt – or for a copy of her credit card statement showing the purchase of the watch – he might be able to produce the guarantee or the box the watch had come in. Or he might have a photograph that clearly showed him wearing the watch.
We contacted Mr B and asked if he could provide any such evidence. A few days later he wrote to tell us he was withdrawing his complaint and no longer wished to pursue the matter.

Thats interesting. I guess, especially for high value items, you do need to provide proof of ownership.

Judging from the ombudsman reply, I'm guessing a photo of the item would have been enough?

I'll remember this in future....

dacouch

Its always best to keep some kind of evidence of ownership as it a) helps prove your claim b) reminds you of what you had (Its often difficult to remember everything if you have a fire or theft

A good thing to do is to photograph expensive items especially jewellery and also walk through your house with a video camera and film what items you have. Its best to keep a copy of this at another home eg your parents as if your house burns down the evidence will go with it.

The other advantage of recording items is that if say an engagement ring you had specially made is lost it can help the jeweller make a copy (Imagine how hard it is trying to describe it exactly to a jeweller. In addition the police can put photos on their database and if the ring turns up at the other end of the country they can reunite it with you (If your Insurers have paid out it will belong to you but they will normally give you the option to buy it off them. Plus it will help the police secure a conviction as otherwise the thief can say it was there ring etc.

[Deleted User]

dacouch wrote: »

Its always best to keep some kind of evidence of ownership as it a) helps prove your claim b) reminds you of what you had (Its often difficult to remember everything if you have a fire or theft

A good thing to do is to photograph expensive items especially jewellery and also walk through your house with a video camera and film what items you have. Its best to keep a copy of this at another home eg your parents as if your house burns down the evidence will go with it.

The other advantage of recording items is that if say an engagement ring you had specially made is lost it can help the jeweller make a copy (Imagine how hard it is trying to describe it exactly to a jeweller. In addition the police can put photos on their database and if the ring turns up at the other end of the country they can reunite it with you (If your Insurers have paid out it will belong to you but they will normally give you the option to buy it off them. Plus it will help the police secure a conviction as otherwise the thief can say it was there ring etc.

I remember when my freezer in the garage packed up just before xmas, the insurer wanted a list of what had been spoilt.

Difficult since I'd chucked the receipt. Had to guess but they were ok with that.

mattymoo

[quote=[Deleted User];21103183]I remember when my freezer in the garage packed up just before xmas, the insurer wanted a list of what had been spoilt.

Difficult since I'd chucked the receipt. Had to guess but they were ok with that.[/QUOTE]

In that scenario, photos of the spoilt food (as you threw it out) would have been the easiest option.

SandC

[quote=[Deleted User];21072359]Thats interesting. I guess, especially for high value items, you do need to provide proof of ownership.

Judging from the ombudsman reply, I'm guessing a photo of the item would have been enough?

I'll remember this in future....[/QUOTE]

I understand where they are coming from in this instance. How many people get bought £1800 watches by a friend? And if they did, how many, on losing the watch, instantly replace it with one of a similarly high value rather than just take the money?