We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

Definition of equivalent re insurance claim

angieamme
angieamme Posts: 48 Forumite
edited 15 June 2012 at 1:38PM in Insurance & life assurance
Hi
Can someone help with a question over the definition of "equivalent" in either a reasonable persons view or legal stance.
Basically had a burglary in May for which the claim has been put out to one set of loss adjustors and now another couple of different firms. I am getting into a sticking point over the term equivalent in relation to my sons bikes.
Basically we buy our bikes from our preferred supplier due to customer service, quality of bikes, technical ability of the guys who build the bikes and their excellent aftercare which we can walk to. So ideally I would prefer to use my preferred supplier to purchase identical bikes as they are what my sons chose for their Christmas presents, colour, style , spec etc.
The Insurance company has their own preferred supplier who may not be able to offer the same bikes or local customer service. They say the definition of equivalent they use relates to specification only.
I can understand equivalent could be interpreted that way should the make & model no longer be available for purchase but not simply because the insurance preferred supplier doesn't stock it.
Apparently if I insist on getting the same model and make of bike I would have to accept the amount they would have paid for a totally different bike which will probably be a lower amount due to their discount.

Would really appreciate some objective guidance on this as I have to confess to being emotionally involved as they basically just want their christmas present bikes back same make and model.
Wording of policy is this.
  • Pay for the cost of an equivalent replacement (if you arrange this direct with your own supplier the insurer will not pay more than it would have cost had they replaced it)
  • Supply you with an equivalent replacement item
I basically think a more accurate wording based on what they are saying should be an equivalent replacement from our preferred supplier which may not be the same make and model but will be the same specification. That way I would have questioned it at the time. To me equivalent means the closest thing available to replace it which would be identical bikes.

Comments

This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.4K Life & Family
  • 261.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.