Content Insurance Claim

macaz77

Hi
Help re. home content insurance please. Today I went from back of my house to the front, via outside garden and side path, in the 30-40 seconds someone entered through my kitchen door and stole my camera (worth £1k) off a kitchen work surface.

I have gone to police just awaiting their call, but I fear I wont get paid by insurance because I cannot see forced entry and given the time lapse I doubt anyone did force the door. But ultimately, honestly IDK if I locked it, because I usually do even if I'm going in garden.

Anyway my policy doc I don't fully understand the clause under exclusions which is relevant. It says

• Theft not involving forcible and violent entry to, or exit from, your home, if you have lent, let or sublet any part of your home or whilst persons other than your family are staying there.

Does that mean theft not involving forced entry is excluded only if house is lent or sublet?

I have Halifax policy covered by Lloyds HIA.

many thanks in advance

Macaz

tempus_fugit

macaz77 wrote: »

• Theft not involving forcible and violent entry to, or exit from, your home, if you have lent, let or sublet any part of your home or whilst persons other than your family are staying there.

Does that mean theft not involving forced entry is excluded only if house is lent or sublet?

Macaz

Yes, that is correct.

macaz77

Its correct, as in even though there is no evidence of forced entry im still insured??

I really thought this was a get out policy that was going to leave me with an invalidated claim.

Blibble

This is worth checking with your insurer if it is sublet; force (in my experience) refer to any concerted act or effort to gain entry to a property or area which would otherwise be off limits to the perpetrator.

I appreciate your terms note force & violence, however, which is a different kettle of fish. Some insurers overlook the violent aspect as long as there has been force, others don't.

If the property is not sublet then this should not fall down on the term you have quoted, depending of course on other terms within your policy.

Aretnap

macaz77 wrote: »

Its correct, as in even though there is no evidence of forced entry im still insured??

I really thought this was a get out policy that was going to leave me with an invalidated claim.

Yes it's correct - unless you're subletting (ie you have a lodger who is not related to you) then the claim will be paid, even if there's no evidence of forced entry. (Assuming there's no other policy term or endorsement requiring you to keep your doors locked)

The majority of standard home insurance policies will cover theft, even if you've carelessly left a door/window unlocked. Most insurers will only add an exclusion requiring forced entry in special circumstances; the most common ones being

(1) previous burglary at the address
(2) high risk area (as they define it)
(3) unusually high value of contents, especially things like jewellery, and
(4) the property is sublet or shared with non-relatives, as there's a greater risk of theft by casual visitors when you have a lot of people coming and going who don't really know each other well.

macaz77

Cheers, no its not sublet, its jusy privately owned by myself and wife (or bank if im being realistic), no other clauses seem tp invalidate, just the worfding of this had me worried.

macaz77

Thank you all for help!