Insurer won't pay!

doodlez1612

Hi. I was burgled yesterday while my partner and I were at work. They got a way with a number of electrical items including a brand new Xbox one.
I spoke to the insurance today and they are refusing to look into it as a claim because the window was left open...regardless of the fact that it's a first floor flat and the door between the window and the rest of the flat was bolted shut!. My argument is that this should be more than sufficient security (and would most likely be considered so if it was external!) and the fact that the small window was left ajar is irrelevant but they claim it is in breach of a clause that states "whenever your home is left unattended all the security devices fitted to your home are put in operation".

Does anyone have any experience of negotiating this kind of thing? I am determined to argue it but not sure how to go about it.

Thanks.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

So how did they get in?

mattk_180

Someone might be able to advise further but I don't think there's anything you can do. Security conditions such as windows and doors usually apply to the exterior of the property and they will have no interest in whether internal doors were locked or not.


Also when they say "security devices" what it their definition of that in the policy wording? Sounds like it refers to alarms but might be defined as window locks, door locks etc.

dunstonh

What does your schedule and policy document say about security? That is the bit that really matters.

martinsurrey

doodlez1612 wrote: »

Hi. I was burgled yesterday while my partner and I were at work. They got a way with a number of electrical items including a brand new Xbox one.
I spoke to the insurance today and they are refusing to look into it as a claim because the window was left open...regardless of the fact that it's a first floor flat and the door between the window and the rest of the flat was bolted shut!. My argument is that this should be more than sufficient security (and would most likely be considered so if it was external!) and the fact that the small window was left ajar is irrelevant but they claim it is in breach of a clause that states "whenever your home is left unattended all the security devices fitted to your home are put in operation".

Does anyone have any experience of negotiating this kind of thing? I am determined to argue it but not sure how to go about it.

Thanks.

On the internal/external thing.

If someone starts kicking in an external door, its MUCH more likely they will be seen and police called.

once they get inside the house, they can take the time to open internal security without the risk of being seen, and even if they are, the house LOOKS secure so doesn't raise suspicion.

that's the logic they use for the internal/external difference

[Deleted User]

Pretty sure they've got you over a barrel there OP.

I'm presuming that they did get in via the open window and kick in the internal door?

Just out of curiosity why is the internal door bolted?

martinsurrey

Colin_Maybe wrote: »

Pretty sure they've got you over a barrel there OP.

I'm presuming that they did get in via the open window and kick in the internal door?

Just out of curiosity why is the internal door bolted?

my guess is its a porch/utility room type set up, quite common in 70's blocks.

FutureGirl

If they got in through the open window, then the insurers are within their right to decline the claim.

Quentin

doodlez1612 wrote: »

I am determined to argue it but not sure how to go about it.....

You can argue your case by way of a complaint. Then if you are unhappy with the response (which you are likely to be), then you can escalate to the FOS for their adjudication at no cost to you.


Their complaints procedure will beset out in the policy docs


After that, and if you remain dissatisfied you are only left with taking legal action, though that would involve you in some cost, so it might be worth getting proper legal advice on your chances of winning in court before embarking on that route.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

So if they got in via the window - it is over, probably.

If they broke in through say the front door and never exited via the window / bolted door route ... then maybe you can try to argue / complain.

Their terms are designed to reduce the risk of you being attractive to burglars by making your place secure. The inference being a house with open windows looks like easy pickings ...

FlameCloud

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Their terms are designed to reduce the risk of you being attractive to burglars by making your place secure. The inference being a house with open windows looks like easy pickings ...

Not really. When used to decline a claim, the breach of any condition or warranty has to be material to it. If they came in through something else, Whether or not an open window was present and making it 'look like easy picking' is irrelevant conjuncture on your part.