Yet another denied bike theft claim by CycleGuard!

longtalker

Hi everyone,

My bike was stolen, and the company it was insured with, CycleGuard, now deny my claim. In short, I live in a flat and the only place where I can lock my bike overnight is to the bike sheds across the street (I use a lock that is approved by them). Cycleguard say that the terms of my policy require that the bike either be stored at the insured location - specifically, in a garage/shed/communal hallway - or, if stored anywhere else, should "not be left unattended for more than 12 hours".

It is clearly my own negligence for not being aware that by locking my bike at the on-street racks, I was not meeting the requirements of the "insured location", however what allows them to deny my claim is the fact that, by my own admission, the bike was left unattended for more than 12 hours. Specifically, as I wrote in the claim form, I locked the bike up at about 8PM and found it gone the next day at about 9AM. It is unfortunate that I did not carefully consult the terms before making the claim and that I was not aware of this 12-hour clause, because the times that I indicated in the form (8PM & 9AM) were but very rough approximations, and thinking about it now (although now might be too late!), it might well have been 9PM or even 10PM on the night when I last locked my bike - at the time I just thought it helps to indicate a larger rather than a narrower interval. Technically, however, my declaration gives them to right to say that I left the bike unattended for 13 hours, which is 1 hour in excess...

Finding flaws with claims is, of course, what insurers do, and I know CycleGuard have a "good" reputation for that, but my bike was worth about 300 pounds, and it seems silly to not get any insurance money for it just because, by being too conservative with my estimation of the time when I last locked the bike, I inadvertently implied an unattended interval of more than 12 hours.

Can people advice whether it might be possible to fight this claim denial, perhaps by making a legal complaint to a third party, or by somehow ammending the times that I indicated in the claim form (although I highly doubt this can be done at this point)? Many thanks in advance for any suggestions!

antrobus

Financial Ombudsman Service
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/

lisyloo

For the future, I'm just wondering is there any reason you can get a piece of cheap carpet to put down and carry your bike inside the flat?

mikey72

You need to be able to prove the time you left the bike. Do you have any witnesses that can prove you where somewhere else until 10.00pm? Anyone who saw you come in? Police report with the incident reported at 9.00am? Then you'll be in a position to advise them you made a genuine mistake, and they should re-assess the claim. If they won't the FOS may help. But you'll need reasonable proof at this stage I would guess.

longtalker

Many thanks for your replies!

I know other people have used Ombudsman in situations where insurers would not pay up, however I am wondering whether in this case I would have a good case for that, given the 13-hour issue created by the times that I indicated in the form, which technically (although not reasonably) entitles them to deny the claim.

My flat is at a high floor, with tight stairs and no lift access, so taking the bike into the flat would unfortunately not have been an option. It will be for my next bike, which will probably be a foldable one!

The police report I only made that evening when I came back from work, so would probably not help. The only witness that I can think of would be my partner, who was at home at the time I locked my bike, however her memory is as good as mine at this point with regards to whether it was 8, 9 or 10PM that I arrived home at that night, after locking the bike!

InsideInsurance

To be honest, any attempt at saying you gave the wrong times is going to simply be treated as fraud given you have signed a declaration that all information is true and you subsequently decide to change the information to something that wouldnt result in a decline.

Unless you have evidence of when you locked the bike and when you discovered it missing then I would suggest you should simply move on. You could submit a formal complaint but at the end of the day you admit you were in breach of the T&Cs and/ or you admit making a false declaration on the claim form, neither of which support your case for getting a settlement.

I'd suggest in future when buying any form of insurance that you read the terms to make sure they are suitable for your needs prior to buying it (or at least as soon as you receive them).

SnowMan

The insurance company can't solely rely on the terms and conditions at least that is how the Financial Ombudsman will assess it.

You have purchased cycle insurance which you reasonably expect to cover you for your bike provided you take reasonable precautions and if there are specific and onerous requirements placed on you by the policy then they need to be made clear to you at time of purchase by the insurer and not just hidden in the terms and conditions.

The ombudsman will look at all this and there is a chance the Ombudsman will find in your favour.

So I would pursue the complaint to the Ombusdman if I were you (see their website for the procedure and the need to complain to the company first).

If you search the Ombusman News newsletters on their website you should be able to find some similar general insurance examples where the case was decided against the insurer because important and onerous conditions or exclusions were hidden in the terms and conditions.

I helped a friend with a claim recently. She was an older lady who had left her suitcase at the end of a carriage on the train as there was nowhere else to put it. The suitcase was stolen. The insurance company turned down the travel insurance claim for stolen baggage because the suitcase couldn't be seen by my friend and the terms said that it had to be left somewhere visible. I argued that it was very difficult to leave the suitcase anywhere else but out of sight and that the out of sight term was not made clear at time of purchase and was hidden in the terms and conditions. The insurance company having initially rejected the claim, backed down before it got to the Ombudsman.

Obviously the case against the insurer was much stronger in that example but it does show that what it says in the terms and conditions isn't conclusive for an Ombudsman claim to fail.

I would not try to claim the period was under 12 hours as that just looks like you trying it on. However the fact that you indicated 13 hours on the claim form is evidence you were not aware of the 12 hour term which provides some evidence on your part that the term was not made clear to you at time of purchase.