Home Insurance - Burglar Alarm Clause

lisyloo

Sandtree said:

TELLIT01 said:

I'll watch this with interest to see what the Ombudsman decides.  Maybe Wagnerman is right and everybody else is wrong.  It has happened.

I dont think there is an issue with the pricing however the maintenance of the clause that claims wont be covered etc when the answer isnt effecting pricing may fall foul of TCF

What would that mean?
If it means that claims would have been covered (in the past) then it's a bit of a moot point isn't it?
I mean good to know but doesn't affect anything after the fact.

Sandtree

lisyloo said:

Sandtree said:

TELLIT01 said:

I'll watch this with interest to see what the Ombudsman decides.  Maybe Wagnerman is right and everybody else is wrong.  It has happened.

I dont think there is an issue with the pricing however the maintenance of the clause that claims wont be covered etc when the answer isnt effecting pricing may fall foul of TCF

What would that mean?
If it means that claims would have been covered (in the past) then it's a bit of a moot point isn't it?
I mean good to know but doesn't affect anything after the fact.

The FOS has guidelines for compensation based on a combination of the level of loss and inconvenience caused. As always it will depend in part on the story spun by the OP... if they've been shopping around and staying with this company because they've always been cheapest and others also were asking for alarm then chances are lower of anything beyond a token value.

Wagnerman

user1977 said:

Wagnerman said:

lisyloo said:

I think you are incorrect.
if you are doing you own insurance DIY i.e. not using a broker, then it’s up to you to check the policy EACH year.
it not correct for you to assume it’s the same and their duty to inform you of changes.
It’s your responsibility to check the policy is still suitable for your needs each and every year.
i Believe you’ll find this in the letters you’ve received at renewal.

if you’re unhappy you can of course go to the ombudsman, but if you agreed to the contract and the price then I don’t think you have a case.
sorry.

As the clause relating to the alarm was also in the policy I think it only reasonable for me to assume that I was still receiving a discount. 

No, this wasn't reasonable for you to assume. And even if it were reasonable for you to assume, it doesn't mean the insurers are liable to pay you anything. They have charged you the correct amount for what you stated on the proposal form. The fact you also chose to have a maintenance contract for the alarm is your own affair - and you have of course had the benefit of a maintained alarm - I can't see any argument that the insurers are meant to indemnify you against that cost.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you read my original post. 

user1977

Wagnerman said:

user1977 said:

Wagnerman said:

lisyloo said:

I think you are incorrect.
if you are doing you own insurance DIY i.e. not using a broker, then it’s up to you to check the policy EACH year.
it not correct for you to assume it’s the same and their duty to inform you of changes.
It’s your responsibility to check the policy is still suitable for your needs each and every year.
i Believe you’ll find this in the letters you’ve received at renewal.

if you’re unhappy you can of course go to the ombudsman, but if you agreed to the contract and the price then I don’t think you have a case.
sorry.

As the clause relating to the alarm was also in the policy I think it only reasonable for me to assume that I was still receiving a discount. 

No, this wasn't reasonable for you to assume. And even if it were reasonable for you to assume, it doesn't mean the insurers are liable to pay you anything. They have charged you the correct amount for what you stated on the proposal form. The fact you also chose to have a maintenance contract for the alarm is your own affair - and you have of course had the benefit of a maintained alarm - I can't see any argument that the insurers are meant to indemnify you against that cost.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you read my original post. 

I'm not sure what's given you the impression that I hadn't.

Wagnerman

TELLIT01 said:

I'll watch this with interest to see what the Ombudsman decides.  Maybe Wagnerman is right and everybody else is wrong.  It has happened.

I had a lengthy conversation with the company yesterday. Without giving a blow by blow account of my arguments, there was acceptance on their part that the clause should not have been in my policy from at least 2008. Other individuals with the same policy did not have the clause. There is also a contractual element in that in return for a discount I undertook to maintain the alarm. The unilateral withdrawal of the discount without telling me and without withdrawing the clause constitutes breach of contract. I was offered some "going away" money which I did not accept so the ball is back in their court to improve the offer. I await their response. The amount is quite academic as it will be donated to Crisis but I would, of course, like Crisis to receive as much as possible. 

I don't think I will post on this forum again as it has not been overly helpful. I am unsure if many of the responses I have received were from individuals who grasped the full facts and, frankly, life is too short to spend an inordinate amount of time correcting misapprehensions. This may be as much my fault by not setting the issues out correctly in the first instance. After a 37 year career of arguing cases before Courts and Tribunals I feel fairly qualified to argue my case and I sense I am making progress but maybe I am just travelling hopefully. We shall see!

Wagnerman

user1977 said:

Wagnerman said:

user1977 said:

Wagnerman said:

lisyloo said:

I think you are incorrect.
if you are doing you own insurance DIY i.e. not using a broker, then it’s up to you to check the policy EACH year.
it not correct for you to assume it’s the same and their duty to inform you of changes.
It’s your responsibility to check the policy is still suitable for your needs each and every year.
i Believe you’ll find this in the letters you’ve received at renewal.

if you’re unhappy you can of course go to the ombudsman, but if you agreed to the contract and the price then I don’t think you have a case.
sorry.

As the clause relating to the alarm was also in the policy I think it only reasonable for me to assume that I was still receiving a discount. 

No, this wasn't reasonable for you to assume. And even if it were reasonable for you to assume, it doesn't mean the insurers are liable to pay you anything. They have charged you the correct amount for what you stated on the proposal form. The fact you also chose to have a maintenance contract for the alarm is your own affair - and you have of course had the benefit of a maintained alarm - I can't see any argument that the insurers are meant to indemnify you against that cost.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you read my original post. 

I'm not sure what's given you the impression that I hadn't.

Sincere apologies. Response not meant for you. More haste less speed. You are quite right in that I benefited from the alarm contract but I only renewed it year on year because of the clause in my policy. Once I contacted the company the clause was immediately withdrawn which implies that it should not have been there once the discount had ceased. Why otherwise would it be withdrawn without an increase in premium or charging me for changing it? The other issue is contractual. In consideration of me having an alarm I received a discount. The unilateral withdrawal of the discount without telling me but retaining the clause in the policy could be construed as breach of contract. I have made headway with the company on that point. I had a long conversation with them yesterday and feel I have made progress. I have put together a number of contract law cases to support my arguments which they are considering. Any sum received from them goes to charity. Apologies again for the unintentional rudeness of my response.

lisyloo

Wagnerman said:

I don't think I will post on this forum again as it has not been overly helpful. I am unsure if many of the responses I have received were from individuals who grasped the full facts and, frankly, life is too short to spend an inordinate amount of time correcting misapprehensions. This may be as much my fault by not setting the issues out correctly in the first instance. After a 37 year career of arguing cases before Courts and Tribunals I feel fairly qualified to argue my case and I sense I am making progress but maybe I am just travelling hopefully. We shall see!

I get where you are coming from, but I do believe the folks on here are open minded and willing to be educated - and yes I mean when I/they are wrong !
Up to you, but I believe it would benefit the level of education and feedback to post once on the outcome. No need to do a running commentary.
I lost part of a case recently with Symbio (electricity) when the ombudsman ruled that email being sent was sufficient to deem notice (even if not received). The education on the general principle of deemed service was useful even though I didn't win on that particular point.
So yes I feel it would feedback into the general education.

Wagnerman

lisyloo said:

Wagnerman said:

I don't think I will post on this forum again as it has not been overly helpful. I am unsure if many of the responses I have received were from individuals who grasped the full facts and, frankly, life is too short to spend an inordinate amount of time correcting misapprehensions. This may be as much my fault by not setting the issues out correctly in the first instance. After a 37 year career of arguing cases before Courts and Tribunals I feel fairly qualified to argue my case and I sense I am making progress but maybe I am just travelling hopefully. We shall see!

I get where you are coming from, but I do believe the folks on here are open minded and willing to be educated - and yes I mean when I/they are wrong !
Up to you, but I believe it would benefit the level of education and feedback to post once on the outcome. No need to do a running commentary.
I lost part of a case recently with Symbio (electricity) when the ombudsman ruled that email being sent was sufficient to deem notice (even if not received). The education on the general principle of deemed service was useful even though I didn't win on that particular point.
So yes I feel it would feedback into the general education.

Just to let you know I have concluded the matter with the insurers. They accepted that, in their words, I had been financially impacted. The difficulty was how to arrive at a figure. Although I had the policy since 1996 their records only went back to 2008 and they accepted that I had not received a discount since then but they had kept the alarm clause in my policy. I couldn't, in all fairness, argue that I should be compensated for the full amount I had paid the alarm company. After all, I had received some benefit by having an annual service even though I did not really want one. Quantifying the amount of discount I would have received on the insurance policy was problematical but I felt 10% to be reasonable. We therefore settled on the basis of a 10% refund of my premiums since 2008. I have received the money and donated it to Crisis in order that some homeless people will benefit from it. A satisfactory outcome I feel. I would have been more than happy to take it to the FO as I felt I had a good case despite what some posters on here felt. I successfully argued a case against HSBC with the FO a couple of years ago so have some experience with the process. The point you mention regarding deemed service is interesting. It is a point which arose many times when I was at work. Appellants often argued that they had not received tribunal notifications. I can't recollect the case but the matter has been tested through the courts and receipt of the notification is not an issue. It merely has to be shown that the notification was issued. Perhaps not fair but what is? 

dld2s

Nice to hear you got a result Wagnerman and very kind of you to donate  the cash to Crisis, well done on both counts.

Just a wee note on the discounts for Alarms. I have a monitored alarm (sadly no BIL who can do the servicing   )  I have always found the discounts minimal (usually a discount of well under a £1 a month ) and not worth putting in that I have a monitored alarm just in case someone forgot to put on the alarm and I think the last one I had a quote with monitored alarm would only pay out on 50% of the claim if the alarm wasn't on.

For the discount received I didn't think it was worth it