£600 increase for home insurance in Low Risk Flood Area.

LYLO

I spent the whole of my day off yesterday trying to sort this!
I LIVE ON TOP OF A HILL IN LOW RISK FLOOD AREA.

Have had home/contents insurance for over 40 years.
Made only one claim in all this time for less than £1000.
Here is the sting...
In 2004 a blocked council drain outside my home led to small amount of surface water leaking into my home and damaging wood floor.
The next day the drain was unblocked and no trouble since.
stupidly I claimed for new floor.

My policy is due for renewal and I now have to answer YES to the question "have you had a claim for flooding in the last 25 years?"
This answer pushed up my premium an extra £600.
Have spoken to numerous brokers and managed to reduce the premium to £400 extra, the underwriters will not insure me for less and have even asked for an environmental report.
Other insurance companies, including those not on comparison sites, have refused to insure me because they have a 10 year flood claim limit.
Looks as though I will be contributing to some directors 5* holiday.

dacouch

Try Aviva or Zurich

InsideInsurance

Unfortunately you are somewhat stuck between a rock and a hardplace.

Fully systemised rating systems will penalise you as despite whatever the environmental agency are telling them about the flood risk you are telling them it has flooded in the past. The level of detail captures is insufficient to differentiate between freak incidents (eg water tanker was in an RTA outside the property and the tank burst flooding your house - had a claim on that once) -v- things that are possibly more likely to repeat.

Where a true underwriter is involved then they can make a more reasoned decision on the likely repeat and ask the relevant questions to cover any circumstances but then the premium reflects the fact its requiring a human who earns a reasonable salary to consider matters rather than an IT system thats a sunk cost and can handle thousands of quotes a minute.

Try those suggested above or speak to a local broker, not swintons, and see if they can help.

LYLO

Thanks for really helpful replies, I had forgotten Zurich! I was insured with them years ago will try tomorrow.
I have also considered a local broker but, as you stated , could be expensive but am going to give it a try.
My insurance policy is going to cost hundreds more, there must be so many in my position!

bossymoo

It's only gone up this year but the flood was 10yrs ago? Was the flood question asked last year?

I've just renewed mine and I don't recall any question about floods - is it part of the previous claims?

weejonnie

As a broker, I would hope that the broker you contact finds out the circumstances and approaches the insurance company rather than just relying on computers.

(Brokers aren't that much more expensive than buying through a comparison site (most of whose policies BTW are set up by third parties i.e. brokers and underwritten by insurers) - they just don't spend millions telling you how cheap they are - and you may find that their 'value added' makes it just as good if not better in the long run)

LYLO

bossymoo wrote: »

It's only gone up this year but the flood was 10yrs ago? Was the flood question asked last year?

I've just renewed mine and I don't recall any question about floods - is it part of the previous claims?

This is what I find so worrying.I used comparison sites and most only ask if I have made claim within last 5 years which is how I have kept my premiums low, however when using Go compare they ask the question "have you ever been effected by flooding" this resulted in premium being raised £600.
This caused me some concern and prompted me to contact brokers and insurance companies personally which is when my premiums were all raised or declined. One company for example refused to insure me because my claim was 9years 9months ago still under their 10 year limit.

It would appear it could have been considered water leakage in the past but now includes the dreaded FL**D word.

Since posting I have found an insurance company which doesn't ask the flood question and am in the process of pursuing this but I will be scrutinizing the policy details.

Quentin

weejonnie wrote: »

(Brokers aren't that much more expensive than buying through a comparison site (most of whose policies BTW are set up by third parties i.e. brokers and underwritten by insurers) - they just don't spend millions telling you how cheap they are - and you may find that their 'value added' makes it just as good if not better in the long run)

Bit of a sweeping statement there from weejonnie (the broker).


And a money saving website hardly the place to come and tell us where to go to pay more!


Worth pointing out to balance this that Weejonnie is well remembered for saving on his advertising costs by using the net (and MSE) disguised as his alter egos "sarni" and "irnbru" (till he got exposed)


Sarni would seize on any insurance related thread and tell us to contact someone good she had heard of (weejonnie's brokers office) who could help.


Or sarni would post a question on the net along the lines of "where's a good place for caravan insurance" on a caravan forum. Then irnbru would trot along 10 mins later and answer with all the contact details for weejonnie!


Nice and cheap - though totally illegal "wolf in sheeeps clothes" behaviour.

OnanTheBarbarian

The use of a broker in this situation seems entirely plausible and appropriate given that they will engage with an underwriter and use appropriate discretion and most likely find an appropriate insurer which will accommodate the risk, rather than "the computer says no."

Yes this is a moneysaving site, but alas it is also full of threads started by members hooting about admin fees, cancellation fees etc when they have "saved money" by going for the most bargain basement quote from some tin pot Gibraltar domiciled insurance outfit, only to find they are not covered for a particular risk and so on.

I don't see what value your post adds here Quentin when all Weejonnie has done is generically recommended that a broker (not a price comparison site) may be a good idea.

Maybe WJ and other aliaises, myself included (before you decide to open that chapter), have been guilty of an attempt at promotion of own business interest in the past. But for god's sake man, get a life and stop playing the self-appointed forum policeman. Are you a forum guide? NO , Are you a Moderator? NO.

How on earth does your post in this thread actually help the OP?

You have so much more to offer than what you did in this thread.

Quentin

And what do you see weejonnies propaganda for brokers post adds to the thread?

Just looks another opportunity for a sweeping statement to promote brokers to us as being better value for money.

OnanTheBarbarian

I see that his post helps people to realise that in this day & age, there is life beyond the price comparison sites - which is often the first port of call for many due to the strength of their advertising and the general shift in buying behaviour.

And, that when a risk may be a problem risk (such as the OP's "flood" stigma) there remains (albeit in very limited numbers) insurance brokers on the high st and at the end of the phone, who may be able to cater for such non-standard risks better than a computer system or keyboard operator in Bangalore.

Fair enough, if he pointed to his own site then he breaches the rules, but he simply championed that maybe a broker could be a better option here and that they are not always more expensive than the price comparison sites.

He may have misbehaved before, but he is not doing it now.

Your criticism of his post, I felt, did not help the subject matter of this thread and merely dredged up some history.

"value for money" in this situation could well be spending £50 more with a broker than the cheapest price comparison driven offering if the appropriate cover considerations and limitations have been tailored to the policyholder's circumstances.

You seem to know your stuff Quentin and are a big asset to the forum with helpful advice and postings, but sometimes, in my opinion, you seem a little too eager to rake up previous faux-pas by some members.

I apologise to and readers of this post that I may have taken this thread a little off topic and I mean no ill-fated feelings to Quentin as we have had the occasional ding dong on here and frankly, I would really like to put such episodes behind me and for them to remain there.