Contents insurance claim - must I accept vouchers

Blue_Doggy

Hi all, this is my first post here.

In January 2012 my house was burgled and some jewellery was stolen and furnishing ruined by the entry and exit of the thief.

The insurance company has now paid up (it took over 2 years, not sure if that's normal) but they want me to accept vouchers for the jewellery, which belonged to my late mother and grandmother. I have explained that I don't really have a jewellery lifestyle, but they say that if they give me cash I will lose several hundred pounds as they get a discount from specified dealers.

Is there any way I can get the full value as assessed by the insurer's valuers but without having to buy jewellery I won't use?

Similarly with a 100% wool rug which was spoiled, if I accept vouchers I lose £150. The valuer based the valuation on a product listed by John Lewis, but John Lewis is not on the list of "approved" suppliers, and the approved suppliers don't actually supply 100% wool rugs.

I apologise if there is a glaringly obvious answer to the question, but I haven't made an insurance claim before, except for vet costs for my pets.

HHarry

Generally not. We were burgaled last year, and received our payment in 8 weeks.

We had two items of antique jewellery (watches) that couldn't be replaced from the High Street, so were offered the full value in cash. For everything else it was either vouchers to the full value of the claim, or cash with a percentage reduction.
It's just the way the insurance industry works.

stator

Unfortunately they are allowed to do this in most cases, you'd have to read your policy to be sure. But in general your insurance is for a replacement item, not cash.
If you can make a case that there is no replacement available from their supplies you can force them to give you money to buy from another supplier, but you may have to appeal to the ombudsmen. So you might have a case with your wool rug. If you had a wool rug and want a replacement wool rug they have to provide you with the means to replace it.

InsideInsurance

The ombudsman has ruled that insurers are entitled to deduct their supplier discount from cash settlements. The only exception to this is if their suppliers are unable to provide appropriate like for like replacements.

What sort of jewelry was it that was stolen? Your strongest argument will be if it was high end brands like Cartier or Tiffany which clearly H Samuels or whoever their preferred provider is will not be stocking.

Blue_Doggy

InsideInsurance wrote: »

What sort of jewelry was it that was stolen? Your strongest argument will be if it was high end brands like Cartier or Tiffany which clearly H Samuels or whoever their preferred provider is will not be stocking.

Thank you for your reply. The jewellery stolen was mostly gold set with coloured stones and had belonged to my late mother and grandmother. It was very old-fashioned, but I don't think they were particularly high-end brand items. Because of their age, I'll never be able to replace them unless I trawl the auctions and secondhand dealers, and even if I found identical items they wouldn't have belonged to my family.

InsideInsurance

Blue_Doggy wrote: »

Thank you for your reply. The jewellery stolen was mostly gold set with coloured stones and had belonged to my late mother and grandmother. It was very old-fashioned, but I don't think they were particularly high-end brand items. Because of their age, I'll never be able to replace them unless I trawl the auctions and secondhand dealers, and even if I found identical items they wouldn't have belonged to my family.

Then this is the angle to try, to say that their preferred supplier cannot provide like for like replacements hence you are going to have to go elsewhere and the vouchers are useless and as such the cash settlement shouldnt be discounted.

In theory there is a small risk the insurer could call your bluff and instruct someone to make the pieces for you etc but given the likely cost its fairly slim.

ripplyuk

Blue Doggy, Could you mention the name of this insurance company? I'd like to avoid any that take over two years to pay out.

Blue_Doggy

ripplyuk wrote: »

Blue Doggy, Could you mention the name of this insurance company? I'd like to avoid any that take over two years to pay out.

Not sure if I'm allowed to name and shame, but they're a big company and are not listed on the insurance comparison websites.

As soon as I can I shall change insurer as it's been a really upsetting experience.

rainy_monsoon

The only claim I've made is for a stolen mobile phone on my house insurance but they were able to give me cash instead of vouchers. I think they just try vouchers first!

*Scarlett

Your insurance is there to hopefully put you back to the same circumstances before the claim - so to replace the jewellery.

If you do not want replacement jewellery items then you may get a cash settlement from the insurer but it will normally be lower than the value of the jewellery that they are offering to replace.

They can offer to replace by means of vouchers if they cannot supply the exact item.

It's not like a stolen laptop that they can just get a replacement model.

It sounds like these items are of sentimental value to you as well and unfortunately insurance takes no account of this.

Blue_Doggy

*Scarlett wrote: »

Your insurance is there to hopefully put you back to the same circumstances before the claim - so to replace the jewellery.

If you do not want replacement jewellery items then you may get a cash settlement from the insurer but it will normally be lower than the value of the jewellery that they are offering to replace.

They can offer to replace by means of vouchers if they cannot supply the exact item.

It's not like a stolen laptop that they can just get a replacement model.

It sounds like these items are of sentimental value to you as well and unfortunately insurance takes no account of this.

The problem is, I'm in my mid-60s, and don't have a life-style which involves a lot of real jewellery; what I already had of my own was plenty, but three people's jewellery (my mother's and grandmother's as well as mine) is too much.

I might have looked to sell it; it just seems to add insult to injury either to have to buy more "bling" than I can use, or not get the full value of what I lost.