Write off capped at estimated value

mr_megs

My motorbike was stolen, I bought it 1.5 years ago for £3900. When I insured it for whatever reason I put that the bike was worth £2000.

Now the bike was stolen and written off and the insurance company said they will only pay £2000 - excess even though the bike is worth around £2800.

Is this just a trick and should i contest this?

ACG

Why did you put £2000 value if its worth £2,800?
You can not expect them to pay more than you put down for its value can you?

Your premiums were partially based on the £2,000 value. You would probably have paid higher premiums if you had put the value as £2,800. No offence but you can not pay premiums on one set of figures but then expect them to pay out on another.

takman

If i was in your position i would have put the value of the bike at £3900 on the insurance considering you only bought it 18 months ago. There is no way that you will be able to claim any more than the value that you insured it at.

I bet you undervalued it to try and reduce the premium!

nidO

mr_megs wrote: »

Is this just a trick and should i contest this?

As others have said, the only "trick" here was you apparently undervaluing your bike presumably to lower your insurance premiums.
It's backfired.

Aretnap

takman wrote: »

There is no way that you will be able to claim any more than the value that you insured it at.

The Financial Ombudsman disagrees.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/motor-valuation.html

We are likely to award the consumer the full retail value – even if they inadvertently underestimated the value of the vehicle when filling in the proposal form or luckily bought the vehicle for less than it was worth.

Though in this case it might be debateable whether you "inadvertently" underestimated the bike's value - why did you put down a value of £2000 when you'd recently bought it for nearly twice that?

ACG

I think the key word there is inadvertently.

Even with a brand new car, it does not halve in price in 18 months.

Edit: Only noticed after I had posted you had already covered it on your post.

magpiecottage

The OP may still complain at the value offered and, if necessary, take it to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

There is no guarantee of success but it will not cost them anything.

mr_megs

I had no idea that any payout would be capped at what I estimated the bike to be. I just put in a quick figure without much thought. Do you think if I estimated an Aston Martin at £50 that my insurance premiums would reflect that estimation? I doubt it.

They're sticking to their guns so I have lodged an official complaint. If they still refuse to offer me the correct market value I will take it to the ombudsman and see what happens. Will keep you informed.

Quentin

mr_megs wrote: »

I had no idea that any payout would be capped at what I estimated the bike to be. I just put in a quick figure without much thought..

If you were insuring your million pound house for half it's value would you expect the full value to be paid you if there was a catastrophic fire which burnt it down?


You will need to convince the FOS that this was "inadvertent"!


(Insuring your aston martin for £50 would obviously raise an immediate question and is a poor simile to use for your under valuation)

rs65

Quentin wrote: »

If you were insuring your million pound house for half it's value would you expect the full value to be paid you if there was a catastrophic fire which burnt it down?

The difference here is that an estimated value for vehicle insurance is not the same as a property sum insured.


OP what does your policy say about how a total loss claim is settled?


Also, could you do anonymous quotes with them to see if a value of £2800 or £2000 makes a difference to the premium.

rs65

mr_megs wrote: »

Do you think if I estimated an Aston Martin at £50 that my insurance premiums would reflect that estimation? I doubt it.

Yes. Some insurers won't cover cars over x value. Some won't provide, say TPF&T cover for high value cars.