Home emergency cover pros and cons

thor

My renewal for boiler cover from Homeserve is coming in at £170 and I am now seriously considering dumping them and adding home emergency cover to my house insurance which I can get for about 50 quid.
The pros and cons of this type of policy as far as I can see are:

Pros
Claims should not affect home insurance premiums.
You are covered for other emergencies, not just boiler.
Premiums are much cheaper.

Cons
Limits with the amount you can claim(typically £750 to £1000 per callout).
I think all these types of policies require the boiler to be serviced annually.

Can anyone come up with anymore, i.e. do you have to use recommended tradesmen?


With the costs being so much cheaper I keep thinking there must be a catch or two somewhere.

dacouch

It's for emergencies only...

mattymoo

As dacouch says, it's for emergencies only to prevent further damage occuring.

So it will pay for a leaking pipe to be fixed if the leak is causing damage. It will not pay to fix a leaky shower head that simply causes water to drip down the plughole.

It will not pay for repairs to boilers that will not ignite or work since they are not going to do any damage if left alone.

I have the BG home cover (300 or 400 I think) and if the price is too high you can reduce it by taking an excess of £40 or £50 per callout. I seem to recall the premium saved meant you would be in profit for 2 callouts and lose out on the 3rd callout in a year.

thor

Despite the 'emergency' bit of the name that never occurred to me. So these types of policies are far less useful than I thought.
Looks like I will have to shell out the big bucks then:(

dacouch

A good example of how they would deal with a claim would be if you ring up to complain your toilet is totally blocked they will ask you if you have another toilet in the house. If you answer yes they will say it is not an emergency

callow

I have a home emergency cover through my insurer's Esure. My boiler stopped working last year in the cold weather. It was only installed 2 years ago and had been serviced a few months before. It did take a few days for the engineer to come out, but the company sent a engineer from the boiler maker. He had all the parts in his van, plus he also replaced a gauge that had been broken for a year. So although I was cold for a few days the boiler was fixed on the first visit and I didn't have to wait for any parts. I didn't have to pay anything.

I will need to get the boiler service yearly, but I do have the back up of the home emergency cover if it breaks down.

I have always been pleased with my home emergency cover: an electrical problem was dealt with within hours and a plumbing problem the next day.

dacouch

callow wrote: »

I have a home emergency cover through my insurer's Esure. My boiler stopped working last year in the cold weather. It was only installed 2 years ago and had been serviced a few months before. It did take a few days for the engineer to come out, but the company sent a engineer from the boiler maker. He had all the parts in his van, plus he also replaced a gauge that had been broken for a year. So although I was cold for a few days the boiler was fixed on the first visit and I didn't have to wait for any parts. I didn't have to pay anything.

I will need to get the boiler service yearly, but I do have the back up of the home emergency cover if it breaks down.

I have always been pleased with my home emergency cover: an electrical problem was dealt with within hours and a plumbing problem the next day.

Which is an example of the type of claims an emergency policy would cover. If you tried the same claim in the middle of summer and had access to an immersion heater they would probably have not covered it

chivers1977

With the FOS complaint that I put in the post box today regarding the dreadful service received from the largest one of these companies today following a flood under a concrete floor, I will never ever buy one of these policies again, whether directly or through my insurer.........

Sweey_as_a_nut

It is indeed for emergency, it worked for me, as it was the cold weather we had two years ago, and the boiler stopped working.
I new what the trouble was, it was the condensate pipe on the outside of the house had frozen, and I could have done it.
However like you I wondered if emergency cover worked so I phoned and they asked was anyone at risk through the cold, so I said yes, and they were there next day, at no cost.

I have a friend who is insured for emergency, and one day found 3 foot of water on is front lawn, luckily he as steps leading to is door so no flood in the house, He phoned the emergency help line and told them what had happened. they asked him what steps he had taken, and he told them he had contacted the water board, the water board came done tests to see if there was any chloride in the water, there was not, so they walked away. After he said all that they said it's no longer an emergency, and they walked away. He ended up paying over £6,000. The moral here is shut your mouth and act dull.

You say it's going to cost £170 to insure your boiler, well, it will cost nearly £100 to service it, and about £70 for the emergency cover. One of the things I would like emergency cover to include is broken windows, however they don't include that mostly. So apart from the boiler braking down only in winter, there is not much else it's good for.

chivers1977

The T&Cs of my policy stated that they would not cover boilers over 15 years old (no idea how old mine is) and if no record of annual service. Make sure that your boiler meets this if this is in your policy otherwise it could be an expensive surprise......