Home Insurance renewal

WaxiesDargle

Hi

My home and contents insurance renewal from the Halifax arrived last week to show that it has gone up from £682 a year to £745 a year paid monthly by DD. Can anyone tell me if this is on the expensive side or about right. (no claims for 5 years)

the breakdown is as follows

£494.30 for Building with accidental damage subject to £100 voluntary
excess and with escape of water £250 additional excess

£176.59 for Contents with accidental damage including high risk items with £100 voluntary excess ...escape of water £250 excess
(total cover for high risk items is £7500...individual high risk is £1500)

£53.70 for Personal belongings with £100 voluntary excess (250 for water)
total cover £2500
limit for money credit cards and mobiles is £500
other individual personal belongings is £1500

£19.99 for legal expenses (£50,000 per incident for legal cost)

all of this is with 30% no claims discount

Thanks

kingstreet

Buildings & contents sums insured?

Based on set figures you provided, or blanket "bedroom rated" cover? Type of property, number of bedrooms, age, postcode etc?

Eg - my 4 bed detached box built in 1995, in ST18;-

buildings insurance, bedroom rated £300k, full AD, £100 XS (£250 water)

plus

contents cover, bedroom rated £30k, full AD, £100 XS, no personal possessions cover is £44.45, monthly renewable, no interest on monthly premiums.

rs65

WaxiesDargle wrote: »

Can anyone tell me if this is on the expensive side or about right.

Impossible to say but it does sound a bit expensive.

Just run your details through a comparison site.

Archergirl

Get those lazy Meerkats to do some work..............

molerat

Ouch !! My £136.74 pa, £11.40 pm interest free, for my 3 bed det sounds cheap then. Unlimited buildings, £100k contents, £30k valuables with individual £1.5K, £3k personal pos, £1k cash, £5k card with accidental cover and £100 xs.

TurnUpForTheBooks_2

rs65 wrote: »

Impossible to say but it does sound a bit expensive.

Just run your details through a comparison site.

Er...think carefully before you click through and start inputting and acting upon data on one of those:

• Your credit file may be searched multiple times by not just the comparison site but by the insurers whose quotes are obtained.
• See this thread detailing a tail of woe with some branded product which AXA underwrite (they operate behind a facade of many apparently competing multi-channel brands a bit like petfood companies do) - this particular visit to a comparison website for Buildings Insurance ended in a nightmare. It in part resulted because comparison sites show prices up front and make very little comparison on the fitness for purpose of the covers or organisations behind the prices.

Archergirl wrote: »

Get those lazy Meerkats to do some work..............

Archergirl are you sure you would be happy with that now after the Norwich upset mentioned above?

Buzby

Give an adjacent address and postcode and any name you like. A quotation is for your information only. If it is in the ballpark, then sign up with the insurer's direct site, saving giving all your derails to multiple vendors for evermore.

Comparison sites are useful, but only when you protect yourself.

rs65

TurnUpForTheBooks wrote: »

Er...think carefully before you click through and start inputting and acting upon data on one of those:

The original question was about price.

What's the alternative if you want to check your renewal price is appropriate? Phone each insurer one at a time? That will probably result in the same credit checks. These credit checks have never done me any harm.

I would never take our cover through a comparison site but they are useful for checking market prices.


ps Was the method pf purchase relevant to the problems that guy is suffering with AXA?

TurnUpForTheBooks_2

rs65 wrote: »

ps Was the method pf purchase relevant to the problems that guy is suffering with AXA?

Absolutely. That AXA ABC wording would never have been purchased if it hadn't appeared as a cheap quote.

Even AXA have other wordings with better cover but they don't promote them at the top of price comparison tables!

It did appear as a cheap quote and look at the absolutely astounding result - he did nothing wrong that we can see (he's published industry letters which I and a number of other insurance savvy people have been appalled by). Now he is homeless and all he did was buy a cheap home buildings insurance via a comparison site and later on needed to claim big time for something everyone would expect to be covered without question.

The AXA ABC insurance policy was not fit for purpose. It was at the top of the comparison tables.

rs65

TurnUpForTheBooks wrote: »

Absolutely. That AXA ABC wording would never have been purchased if it hadn't appeared as a cheap quote.

Even AXA have other wordings with better cover but they don't promote them at the top of price comparison tables!

What was the difference between this AXA wording and any other AXA wording that was relevant to his claim? ps I'm not doubting you just genuinely interested. The only AXA wordings I've seen include architects/debris etc within the buildings sum insured. Curious as to what was in his wording that made it cheap, as far as buildings cover is concerned.

TurnUpForTheBooks_2

rs65 wrote: »

What was the difference between this AXA wording and any other AXA wording that was relevant to his claim? ps I'm not doubting you just genuinely interested. The only AXA wordings I've seen include architects/debris etc within the buildings sum insured. Curious as to what was in his wording that made it cheap, as far as buildings cover is concerned.

Well it's been a while since I took apart a rebuilding cost estimate into its component parts, but if you have an artificial inner limit on one component it clearly works against any protection derived from a blanket limit.

You'll have to ask AXA why they introduce these weird inner limits no-one understands, least of all loss adjusters who treat them like each was an underinsured gem in some lost necklace, one that is actually strung together in unlikely form by AXA themselves, and then half-restrung by adjusters into some totally inadequate thing shorter even than a bracelet. (that wasn't a particularly good analogy but maybe you know what I am getting at!)

No, I think we can guess what they were up to, and as has long been the case, when the marketing types start messing with the policy wordings to suit the economics of paying away large commissions to middlemen, and simultaneously to get that product at the top of price comparison charts, the lunatics are in control of the asylum.