Home Insurance Discussion

dacouch

Sandie5 wrote: »

Hi, could someone advise on when you need the policy to be joint as for example on confused.com, it asked if you would like to add a joint policy holder but it also asks you to detail the occupants so if the policy includes my husband as an occupant do I need to add him as a joint policy holder?
Confused??

It would be best to add him

mowest1962

Hi i'm looking for home contents insurance..when filling in the forms does it make any difference to the price i pay. if i put it in just my name or both mine and the wives name.
thank you

Leodogger

Has anyone had the experience of getting quotes on comparison web sites and then when going through to their official websites to get the quote, they offer discounts on their own website and so the price comes down to the same as on the comparison web site ?

I tried Santander after getting a quote for £107 for blgs and contents insurance on a comparison site. I went onto their official website and noticed they were offering 30% discount for being a 123 account holder which we are. When I went through their quote system the price was exactly the same so I rang them up only to be told that the £107 quoted was AFTER allowing for the 123 discount although when I obtained the quote the system did not know me from Adam and obviously therefore was not offering a discount if this was the price stated, nothing indicated that this was the price AFTER allowing for a 123 account holder discount. I almost ended up in an argument with the customer services girl who maintained that the price I was quoted on the comparison website was the same only because the site offered a discount as a new customer ? So I pointed out that this was sales misrepresentation as they were quoting the same price after allowing for me being a 123 account holder and no mention of the 30% discount in the quote ! :mad:

Bappoo

Hi Everyone,

I am one of those honest folks, who doesnt put in shady claims and always keeps his policies up to date in the hope that, when something does actually go wrong, I will be covered. Anyway, on 2 occasions in the last 12 months, I have had, what I thought should be a reasonable claim and my insurer has told me, on both occasions that the policy does not provide cover for such things.

On the first occasion, I had a leak in my roof, after a few days of heavy rain. It caused the plaster to crack in several rooms and cost me around £500 to have repaired. The insurance company denied the claim because the wind speed was not high enough during the period in question, to count as a storm.

Now, just today I have learned that I have a bed bug infestation and I need to replace a fair amount of my furniture. Guess what? The insurance company doesnt cover this either.

I called the broker to see if I should be getting some more comprehensive cover but they said that vermin and wear and tear are simply not covered under any policy.

It's driving me nuts that I am paying out for insurance and it seems that every time something goes wrong that ends up costing me money, the insurance doesnt cover it.

Does anyone have any advice please?

Thanks

Quentin

It's the norm not to cover damage by bedbugs or wear and tear in standard policies.

Some policies do offer an extra that would cover exterminating the bed bugs..

No insurer covers losses due to wear and tear.

Annoyingly you now have 2 reported losses to disclose to any future insurer you go to for quote over the next 3 to 5 years.

Make sure any future losses in the near future are going to be accepted as a claim before reporting them as 3 + incidents could affect future dealings with insurers.

Leodogger

Bappoo wrote: »

Hi Everyone,

I am one of those honest folks, who doesnt put in shady claims and always keeps his policies up to date in the hope that, when something does actually go wrong, I will be covered. Anyway, on 2 occasions in the last 12 months, I have had, what I thought should be a reasonable claim and my insurer has told me, on both occasions that the policy does not provide cover for such things.

On the first occasion, I had a leak in my roof, after a few days of heavy rain. It caused the plaster to crack in several rooms and cost me around £500 to have repaired. The insurance company denied the claim because the wind speed was not high enough during the period in question, to count as a storm.

Now, just today I have learned that I have a bed bug infestation and I need to replace a fair amount of my furniture. Guess what? The insurance company doesnt cover this either.

I called the broker to see if I should be getting some more comprehensive cover but they said that vermin and wear and tear are simply not covered under any policy.

It's driving me nuts that I am paying out for insurance and it seems that every time something goes wrong that ends up costing me money, the insurance doesnt cover it.

Does anyone have any advice please?

Thanks

Sounds either like a crap company or else insurance company is trying to get out of paying (lol).

It seems to me that as the years go on insurance companies come out with more and more stupid clauses to prevent someone claiming. I actually don't believe in insurance really and so try to get the most basic cover (i.e. for my house burning down etc.), I have heard so many people who have tried to claim without success. I just don't understand why people bother to try to cover for every contingency i.e. possessions, one off item cover (when insurance companies will inevitably ask for the bluddy invoice for how much you paid, even if the item is 40 yrs old (jewellery) without which they will not pay out, then the insurance company will come along and find a tiny clause buried in the policy somewhere which when interpreted by them means you can't claim ! :mad:

Leodogger

As an example of how insurance companies have clamped down on claims. We had a leaking roof 40 yrs ago and it ruined all our plaster after had a heavy rainfall. We claimed for the leak to be repaired and the decorating to be carried out, neither cost was questioned at that time and there was NEVER a mention of wind speed !!!!!! What the hell as the wind speed got to do with anything, a water escape from a leaky roof is a water escape - end of !:mad:

Spikey1

The policy doesn't cover leaking roofs and never has done....it covers damage caused by Storm.

Of course it follows that a roof which is in need of attention will leak during a period of rainfall......but that doesn't mean that the roof was damaged by a Storm. There are many reasons why a roof would develop a problem...all building elements suffer from age-related deterioration and wear & tear.....that's never been covered by the insurance policy.

The wind speed is absolutely essential to know when an Insurer is considering whether a roof may have been damaged by a Storm.

Insurance is like anything else....if you think its a rip-off or don't feel that you get value for money....don't purchase it, simple as that. However, from your comments here and on the other thread I was helping you with I think you have some fundamental misunderstandings of insurance perils and how the cover works. I'd spend some time reading your policy when you receive it and familiarise yourself with what IS covered along with the exclusions then determine whether you have selected the right policy cover for you and your circumstances.

Leodogger

Spikey1 wrote: »

The policy doesn't cover leaking roofs and never has done....it covers damage caused by Storm.

Of course it follows that a roof which is in need of attention will leak during a period of rainfall......but that doesn't mean that the roof was damaged by a Storm. There are many reasons why a roof would develop a problem...all building elements suffer from age-related deterioration and wear & tear.....that's never been covered by the insurance policy.

The wind speed is absolutely essential to know when an Insurer is considering whether a roof may have been damaged by a Storm.

Insurance is like anything else....if you think its a rip-off or don't feel that you get value for money....don't purchase it, simple as that. However, from your comments here and on the other thread I was helping you with I think you have some fundamental misunderstandings of insurance perils and how the cover works. I'd spend some time reading your policy when you receive it and familiarise yourself with what IS covered along with the exclusions then determine whether you have selected the right policy cover for you and your circumstances.

Like I said, if you read my post, I DON'T believe in insurance policies, in my experience an insurance company will go to great lengths NOT to pay out due to some buried clause in the policy.

Insurance companies rely on expert policy underwriters who know how to word a policy to exclude most events, they as I say are insurance EXPERTS who are out to sell but not to pay out if they can get away with it. Most people are not insurance experts and that is what the companies rely on.

"Caveat Emptor" - Buyer beware. Insurance should be a REassurance that if things go wrong you will be covered, most of the time they are NOT as I have found to my peril !!

I presume you work for an insurance company as it is rare to find anyone defending insurance companies :rotfl:

Leodogger

JWhite wrote: »

Like I said, if you read my post, I DON'T believe in insurance policies, in my experience an insurance company will go to great lengths NOT to pay out due to some buried clause in the policy.

Insurance companies rely on expert policy underwriters who know how to word a policy to exclude most events, they as I say are insurance EXPERTS who are out to sell but not to pay out if they can get away with it. Most people are not insurance experts and that is what the companies rely on.

"Caveat Emptor" - Buyer beware. Insurance should be a REassurance that if things go wrong you will be covered, most of the time they are NOT as I have found to my peril !!

I presume you work for an insurance company as it is rare to find anyone defending insurance companies :rotfl:

"Of course it follows that a roof which is in need of attention will leak during a period of rainfall......but that doesn't mean that the roof was damaged by a Storm."

This is what I mean, insurance companies will interpret a clause differently to the average person who just thinks if their roof leaks and you are covered for escape of water, they are covered. You have just proved your own case for not buying insurance. :rotfl: