An Act Of God ???

Rebel_UK

Hi All,

Before I go on, let me point out I have no desire to upset or annoy anyone of any religious faith, I'm simply trying to open debate on a point of law, which I may challenge...

In my insurance policies I find a paragraph that relates to events occurring that may cause damage to my property, covered by my insurance, as being not covered because they are listed as being 'an act of god'. Now my point is, I am not religious, I have no belief in a god of any kind, therefore, i do not recognize any event occurring as 'being an act of god'.

I wonder if, being that I personally have no belief in a supreme being known as god, I could challenge this assumption, statement, clause, in a court of law ?

As I do not hold a belief in god, could I request this clause be removed from my insurance policy, or at least, be disregarded since it bears no meaning or holds no legitimate legal ground given my beliefs?

just asking

Rebekl

Gabriel-Ernest

I don't think these days it means 'Act of God,' just an event which is outside the control of humans and therefore something which the insurers can't predict. I doubt very much if any insurer will remove it.

Are you arguing about the existence of the clause or the name of the clause? If they changed it to 'act of nature' would you still object?

Astaroth

"Act of God" is a legally accepted term and obviously is not a literal meaning but a easy term to cover off forces of nature and other events which are not a result of a third party.

For a rather tongue in cheek definition:
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=act+of+god&type=1&submit1.x=0&submit1.y=0&submit1=Look+up

superswitch

There's a good movie about this, staring Billy Connelly.
http://www.thezreview.co.uk/dvdreviews/m/manwhosuedgod.shtm

Kinnairdy

Simple answer - No chance.
It's a standard clause in Buildings Insurance Policies, the personal beliefs/views of the Policy holder have no bearing whatsoever on the Policy or it's content.

gazza975526570

Kinnairdy wrote:

Simple answer - No chance.
It's a standard clause in Buildings Insurance Policies, the personal beliefs/views of the Policy holder have no bearing whatsoever on the Policy or it's content.

To add to one of the most ridiculous threads ever:

If you dont like any part of the policy, including its terminology, then dont buy the insurance product

Sorry - didnt mean to quote the previous poster!

Rebel_UK

Thanks for those links guys made some interesting reading, and a few laffs.

Err gazza, get a life mate, if the thread is so ridiculous why bother adding to it, especially by simply stating an obvious choice

rebel

Gem_

I seem to remember one train company that was especially unpopular with God. The only time a train is excused from being late, in performance recording terms, is if it was an act of God. The company had attributed hundreds of late arrivels to his mightyness whereas other companies had only annoyed Him once or twice

Can't for the life of me remember which train company this was, which is now going to bug me all day!

G

Astaroth

isnt it all of them?

Gem_

Ah I have found it:

The unloved ones were Northern Rail who in 2005 had 2,179 cancellations for Act of God / Weather compared to 31 for GNER and none at all for the Gatwick Express. Having been on many a Northern Rail train I can see His point ....

The source is here if anyone is a bored as me:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060201/text/60201w23.htm

gazza975526570

Rebel_UK wrote:

Thanks for those links guys made some interesting reading, and a few laffs.

Err gazza, get a life mate, if the thread is so ridiculous why bother adding to it, especially by simply stating an obvious choice

rebel

If its so obvious then why didnt you think about it before buying the product if its an issue for you instead of asking if you can ask to have a part of their policy removed?