Ex Partner wants to claim on house insurance

Debt_Free_Chick

uncomike wrote: »

What about small claims court, would that favour them? It is a lot of if's buts and maybe's on their part.

They would be claiming that I'm withholding the means of claiming.

I shall find out if they are able to claim.

As I'm not willing to, I don't believe its even lost.

If your ex is named on the policy, I'd suggest you send them the details on how to claim. You can then leave it for the insurer to deal with your ex and validate the claim. And it will avoid any further need for you to become involved and potentially give your ex and you another thing to fall out over!

Errata

Ex is named on the policy as someone who lives with you? Ex no longer lives with you so has no valid claim.
Ex isn't named on the policy? Ex doesn't live at the policy address so has no valid claim.

Thegirl

Ring you insurer and check. It's probably not covered as they don't live there any more.
For that matter, since they don't live with you if you tell your insurer that your premiums will probably go down, mine are more expensive due to my engagement and wedding rings having to be itemised.
You need to speak to your insurer to advise them he no longer lives with you before you give him the details of the insurance (if that is what you choose to do in order to keep the peace). That way you know that they are informed of the truth. Then if he chooses to lie/attempt to commit insurance fraud you can be sure that you have been totally up front with them.
He can't claim from you in the small claims court or in the divorce. He's a big boy, if he lives elsewhere then he needs to be insured. If he's new place got robbed, would he be asking to make a claim on your insurance for that too? This is his screw up, not yours.

pedro123456

uncomike...........look lifes to short..........couples fall out on a regular basis for many reasons, and it goes without saying that these fall outs manifest themselves in many ways, anger, bitteness spitefulness etc etc.
Dont let your split up make you spiteful, bitter or angry, you may live to regret it, and it doesn't serve any purpose anyway.

If she/he was part of the insurance give her/him insurance details let them get on with it............no one in here can say its a genuine claim or not. You will have then done the "right thing" and your concience will be clear.

However, my thoughts are this........the IC will not pay out, not in a million years
If they do I will do, I will go naked on the top of our town hall steps and line dance too Gangam style :dance:

kingstreet

Do you have the personal possessions add-on?

If not, it's doubtful the watch is covered for loss away from home.

Thegirl

kingstreet wrote: »

Do you have the personal possessions add-on?

If not, it's doubtful the watch is covered for loss away from home.

Poster did mention it was listed.

Problem there is that it was not the ex's home anymore.

FlameCloud

dacouch wrote: »

An Insurer will look at a claim for a Rolex of any value with a very very fine toothed comb.

It's highly unlikely if the ex does not live with you that the claim would be paid even if it has been lost.

I love Rolex claims. It's rare to come across a company so willing to help if they think a claim is bent.

Errata

Ex now wants to take me to small claims court or take 5k off our divorce settlement

Your ex has lost the plot if they think they have a court case, and you may wish to make your solicitor aware that in saying you will have to take £5k less in your divorce settlement they are trying to blackmail you in to committing fraud.

rs65

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

If your ex is named on the policy, I'd suggest you send them the details on how to claim. You can then leave it for the insurer to deal with your ex and validate the claim. And it will avoid any further need for you to become involved and potentially give your ex and you another thing to fall out over!

If I was the OP, I wouldn't want anyone making a claim that I had the tiniest inkling may be fraudulent on a policy that I was named on.

Debt_Free_Chick

rs65 wrote: »

If I was the OP, I wouldn't want anyone making a claim that I had the tiniest inkling may be fraudulent on a policy that I was named on.

Fair point - but that's why I suggested OP stayed right out of it.

You think he could be implicated if the claim is fraudulent, even if he's in no way involved?