Real-life MMD: Should I return £2,000 insurance cash?

Gotapikapokitor2

Does it do anything besides tell the time?
I think I'd like to look at it, but for £2000 I'd rather look at a photo of it.

kwmlondon

This reminds me of a friend of mine who had a watch damaged. The watch was sent off to the insurance company's assessment group that - surprise, surprise - comprised a large chain of jewellers. So, she got a voucher for this chain of jewellers. She was very surprised as the watch she sent off for repair wasn't that badly damaged but was deemed beyond repair.

I think the whole rotten industry stinks.

kwmlondon

Oh, and my opinion, for what it's worth is that the insurance company has paid an "independent" assessor to look at the watch. If they've returned it to you then it's for scrap only and if it's begun working again it's still been assessed by an expert. You are not an expert so rely on their judgement.

To give a parallel, I had a motorbike written off. The assessor said I could keep the bike for £400 or accept a cheque for its replacement. I thought that on balance I didn't want to accept the risk for the repair of the motorbike and took the money. The watch is the same. They've deemed it's not worth the risk of trying to fix and and they've valued it as worth nothing so keep it.

If it dies in six months then hey, you've lost nothing, but you have been totally honest in your dealings with the insurance company and they have applied all their rules and policies and you've ended up with a watch that works at the moment and a voucher to get a new one. Sell it and pay off any debts you have.

41_and_i_know_it

When you claimed on the insurance, you believed the watch to be damaged as it had been through the mangle (pardon the pun), not only that, you had an insurer examine the watch and in their 'expert' opinion it had reached the end of its life 'cycle' (sorry again). This is not your fault you did your part and they said it was 'beyond repair', for all you know there could be a manufacturer fault and even though its working now it could stop again in the foreseeable future. Brands such as Omega sell by reputation for reliability and are an investment, if a watch is inconsistent or unreliable might as well buy one from the pound shop. It probably is very attractive but behind the well thought out and constructed exterior is the most important part, and Omega do not want people walking around saying 'darn this watch, I paid for an Omega and the cheap watch I used to have keeps better time etc'. Forgive yourself, say 10 hail marys and strap a very tight tie around your leg. They've already processed your claim, you would be a pain to ring and complain and question an expert's opinion that it is beyond repair and you could get them into trouble. You can only use the voucher for Omega or their group products so everyone's a winner. I can think of many people who should feel guilty, most are politicians and people with obscene amounts of power.

Take_it_like_a_man,_sonny

I had sofa set which one chair broke. Cost new was £450, insurance payout was £650. Should I had told them? Cost was for replacment, so evenmtually got a new sofa set, for said amount. Still got two seater from old set. Should I tell the insurance I kept old two setaer?

No, they have paid on the claim and that is what insurance is for.

41_and_i_know_it

patriceb wrote: »

Yes you should return the money, its folks like you that cause insurance to be so costly for others, there are a lot of people that make false claims and then everyone else suffers from inflated insurance prices.:mad::mad:

Not everyone can afford insurance, but for the ones that can, then tough luck. When shoplifters steal from supermarkets then prices go up but we don't make people fill in a confession or document to say they are in good faith going to pay for everything they take out of the shop. Things need to be paid for when the books don't add up, this decision is made by the companies and whether you agree or not whatever we do there is no concrete proof that the increases are caused by us, if they want to put up premiums the 'right' statistics will appear from somewhere. Shoplifters often steal because they need to eat and feed their kids, not all of them I know, so I'd rather they did. You'd do anything for your kids and in desperate times we all have to wrestle with our conscience.

41_and_i_know_it

crazy_crow wrote: »

You should return the money but only after having the watch looked at by an expert. It maybe working now but that is not to say it will continue to work or thatit is undamaged.

I can't believe people think its ok to keep the money.

You pay insurance to cover yourself for any losses. If your watch is now perfectly ok you haven't suffered any loss.
Ive been paying car and house insurance for 30 years and have been lucky enough to have NEVER claimed. I don't won't my money to go towards other people profiting from their insurance claims.

Who's going to pay for the expert, I'm sure the insurance company won't oblige because they have already paid an 'expert' of their choosing already. Whoopy-doo you've never claimed, hopefully you won't experience a flood, fire, or similar disaster but do you rate them on a scale of 0-10. Handbag pinched lets call it a 2, house burgled a 7 etc. You have no right to compare yourself to others who through no fault of their own are victims, or believe that if you pay an insurance policy and the wording is understood when you purchase it, that in the event of a claim you are guilt-free as this is what you are paying for protection for the unexpected.:p

g3ldig

I think you definitely need to send it back. In the end you (and other customers) will be paying for the £ 2000 you received by insurance rates that go up, so it isn't a free ride. The fact that you're asking this question shows that really you know that it isn't correct to keep the money while your watch is working perfectly well. If you had to pay to get your watch repaired then I think you can deduct that amount from the £ 2000.

pineapple

g3ldig wrote: »

I think you definitely need to send it back.

What? :eek:
Personally I don't think there is anything morally or legally wrong for the reasons already covered by various posters. But if it was troubling me the first action would be to contact the insurers and keep a record of the dialogue and who I spoke to. I suspect that the very last thing they would want is for you to send it back and it certainly shouldn't be done without discussing it with them :huh:

Since this is supposed to be a real life situation, it would be interesting to know the outcome.

milvusvestal

The insurer declared the watch beyond repair and, whether you subsequently had it repaired or not, I doubt very much whether they will reverse their decision.

The voucher's value depends upon what it can be used for. Often they are limited to certain goods and services and, occasionally, holidays, so you need the weigh its value to you as an individual against the loss of your premium excess, and the consequent rise in your insurance premium next year, now that you have this claim on record.

If you don't think you can make much use of the voucher, then try and convince the insurance company that their original decision was wrong. After all, it could well be that they thought the cost of repair was going to be expensive, and their cheap way out was the issue of a voucher that costs them barely anything at all.