Can I claim against contents 6 months after losing something?

Dangermac

alstemp wrote: »

Hi all

At the end of March I lost a diamond bracelet - whilst I was out shopping in my local Waitrose which is literally around the corner from my house.

Anyway, at the time I didn't do anything about it - other than check with Waitrose and retrace my steps. Was gutted. However one thing I didn't do was report it to the police or claim against my contents. It is specified as a unique item on my insurance policy as it is a high value item and covered for loss outside of my house.

Do you think I can still claim for it now in December? Or is it too late?

Also - my policy (currently with the AA) runs out day after tomorrow (only just opened the reminder!) and am in process of getting competitive quotes. If I was to claim on the AA poilcy would they still honour it if I change suppliers from Fri 21st??

thanks for any advice . . .

I think that it's a really sad sign of the times when a customer is looking for assistance/help/possibly leniency from their insurer, but at the same time is looking to leave that same insurer, to save probably no more than a small amount of money.

DM

Quentin

Dangermac wrote: »

I think that it's a really sad sign of the times when a customer is looking for assistance/help/possibly leniency from their insurer, but at the same time is looking to leave that same insurer, to save probably no more than a small amount of money.....

The customer paid for 12 months of cover. It's a business arrangement.

And you don't comment on the way insurers take advantage of their clients loyalty by making their renewals more expensive than a new customer would pay.

That's why the general MSE advice is always shop around at renewal time - which is presumably what the OP is doing, and there is no need to contribute a sermon on the "sad sign of the times" you see in the OP asking a perfectly reasonable question about whether moving insurers will affect the claim.

(As most people reading the threads here will be well aware, insurers these days don't pay any claims unless they have to!!)

Dangermac

Quentin wrote: »

The customer paid for 12 months of cover. It's a business arrangement.

And you don't comment on the way insurers take advantage of their clients loyalty by making their renewals more expensive than a new customer would pay.

That's why the general MSE advice is always shop around at renewal time - which is presumably what the OP is doing, and there is no need to contribute a sermon on the "sad sign of the times" you see in the OP asking a perfectly reasonable question about whether moving insurers will affect the claim.

(As most people reading the threads here will be well aware, insurers these days don't pay any claims unless they have to!!)

Quentin - you make some decent points. But this is a forum, and I'm entitled to my opinion.

Yes, I agree that it is really bad that existing clients arent always offered the best prices.

I stick to my point that it's a sad sign of the times that loyalty seems to be a thing of the past. Loyalty can work both ways, and perhaps the insurers are as bad as consumers.

DM

rs65

Dangermac wrote: »

I think that it's a really sad sign of the times when a customer is looking for assistance/help/possibly leniency from their insurer, but at the same time is looking to leave that same insurer, to save probably no more than a small amount of money.

DM

I agree.

The AA wording requires notification as soon as possible. Bearing in mind that the claim won't be properly considered until after renewal, I would personally be renewing with them.

Other points:-

AA wording allows for auto renewal, unless 7 days notice is given.

The OP may get revised renewal terms once the claim is notified.

Any false statement will result in the claim not being paid and cover ceasing.

hugoshavez

_Andy_ wrote: »

Insurance fraud then..do you really expect anyone here to say 'hey that's a good idea'?

Once again, almost certainly not.

A breach of good faith, and probable condition breach, but this is not fraud!

hugoshavez

Quentin wrote: »

The customer paid for 12 months of cover. It's a business arrangement.

...

(As most people reading the threads here will be well aware, insurers these days don't pay any claims unless they have to!!)

Is that something of a double standard you're showing?

Quentin

I dunno.

What I am saying is that the customer paid for 12 months cover, and is perfectly entitled to move elsewhere at the end of the cover. The Insurer also only has to provide cover for the whole of the 12 months, and the customer is not beholden just because they make a claim!

And the insurer is quite correct to only pay a claim if they have to under the policy conditions.

Where is the double standard you accuse me of?