60 days unoccupied means not insured

MalMonroe

Hi, it seems that you have to have extra cover, there's more info in the following link -

https://www.moneysupermarket.com/home-insurance/unoccupied/

and lots more info if you google something like "short term home insurance unoccupied".

moneysaver128

DullGreyGuy said:

What is unclear from the wording is if you were going to be away for 90 days, have a burst pipe after 10 days and so rush home the same day. 

If you were planning to be away 50 days, are away 50 days and the pipe bursts on day 10 then you are covered if you come home straight away or not. 

As has been said already, the clause is intended to prevent arguments over if the pipe burst on day 58 or 62 of you 90 day holiday.

No it does not mean you will covered on a 50 day holiday if you have a burst pipe  and return home or not. It means exactly what it says and  was confirmed when I put that point to PostOffice/Ageas on the telephone and in their email. It means they will not cover certain events within the 60 days - ie burst pipes vandalism etc.

DullGreyGuy

moneysaver128 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

What is unclear from the wording is if you were going to be away for 90 days, have a burst pipe after 10 days and so rush home the same day. 

If you were planning to be away 50 days, are away 50 days and the pipe bursts on day 10 then you are covered if you come home straight away or not. 

As has been said already, the clause is intended to prevent arguments over if the pipe burst on day 58 or 62 of you 90 day holiday.

No it does not mean you will covered on a 50 day holiday if you have a burst pipe  and return home or not. It means exactly what it says and  was confirmed when I put that point to PostOffice/Ageas on the telephone and in their email. It means they will not cover certain events within the 60 days - ie burst pipes vandalism etc.

Who were you speaking to? Claims or Sales & Service?

Its not what it says, if it was Claims (which I'd put a little more weight on normally) then you are almost certainly talking to the FNOL team who are only fractionally better trained -v- Sales & Service

Smithcom

moneysaver128 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

What is unclear from the wording is if you were going to be away for 90 days, have a burst pipe after 10 days and so rush home the same day. 

If you were planning to be away 50 days, are away 50 days and the pipe bursts on day 10 then you are covered if you come home straight away or not. 

As has been said already, the clause is intended to prevent arguments over if the pipe burst on day 58 or 62 of you 90 day holiday.

No it does not mean you will covered on a 50 day holiday if you have a burst pipe  and return home or not. It means exactly what it says and  was confirmed when I put that point to PostOffice/Ageas on the telephone and in their email. It means they will not cover certain events within the 60 days - ie burst pipes vandalism etc.

If your response is accurate (which I doubt is the case), you need a new policy !!

It sounds like they only provide full cover to people who do not leave their home, ever

Very odd indeed

SC

Aretnap

moneysaver128 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

What is unclear from the wording is if you were going to be away for 90 days, have a burst pipe after 10 days and so rush home the same day. 

If you were planning to be away 50 days, are away 50 days and the pipe bursts on day 10 then you are covered if you come home straight away or not. 

As has been said already, the clause is intended to prevent arguments over if the pipe burst on day 58 or 62 of you 90 day holiday.

No it does not mean you will covered on a 50 day holiday if you have a burst pipe  and return home or not. It means exactly what it says and  was confirmed when I put that point to PostOffice/Ageas on the telephone and in their email. It means they will not cover certain events within the 60 days - ie burst pipes vandalism etc.

So do you think you are covered for vandalism or burst pipes if they happen while you are away for the weekend, while you're at work or even while you pop out to the corner shop?

If not then the policy is obviously inadequate to the point of absurdity. I don't believe that any policy would leave you without cover if you stepped out of your home for any length of time at all.

If so then the policy must define a different time period (shorter than 60 days but longer than a few hours) which applies to certain sections. Where does it define this and how long do you have to be away from home before the escape of water and vandalism sections cease to apply?

In reality all the text that has been quoted is quite clear to me. The unoccupied exclusion only applies if you are away (or at least plan to be away) for more than 60 days. Reference to "events within the first 60.days" are just there to emphasise the fact that if you have an incident on day 10 of a 90 day holiday, the exclusion still applies. But there must still be an absence of at least 61 days for the exclusion to apply at all.

I don't know what you've been told.on the phone but your cover is defined by what your policy documents say - not by what the person who answers the phone thinks that they say. I suspect that either the person who answered the phone either is poorly trained and doesn't understand the policy, or he misunderstood your question, or you misunderstood his answer. If you're inclined to follow up you could ask him exactly how long you ARE allowed to leave your home for before most of the useful sections cease to apply, and where this time period is laid out in your policy book. That will fox him.

moneysaver128

'Reference to "events within the first 60.days" are just there to emphasise the fact that if you have an incident on day 10 of a 90 day holiday, the exclusion still applies.'

That may be the case but with a insurance document you should not be expected to fill in the gaps in meaning. In reality its a typical example of dreadful piece of writing that has not been edited or even examined before being published. It has probably been cut and pasted and possibly 'left alone' before printing because nobody dared ask the underwriter or actuary what on earth he was getting at.

DullGreyGuy

Its more the other way round, insurers cannot leave alternative interpretations on the table as the ombudsman will accept the customer's reading of the terms if they are reasonable.

In mass market consumer insurance an underwriter or wordings specialist will have drafted the terms and been reviewed by compliance. Often the issue isnt that it hasn't been reviewed but it's been authored by too many people all attempting to make the wording clear.

Actuaries are not involved in setting wordings (outside of L&P and that's only because most people are actuaries outside operations in a L&P firm) but mainly capital requirements and occasionally reserving or pricing (though statisticians rather than actuaries normally do pricing)

moneysaver128

Agreed, the policy seems possibly authored by too many people and the clause in question reads that way. What role therefore has the IPID document which is supposed to simplify the policy to its main points? I would say the 60 day (Un)occupation clause deserves very clear wording in the IPID and highlighting as a kind of double check. Thanks for all the comments. I will now close this discussion.

DullGreyGuy

moneysaver128 said:

Agreed, the policy seems possibly authored by too many people and the clause in question reads that way. What role therefore has the IPID document which is supposed to simplify the policy to its main points? I would say the 60 day (Un)occupation clause deserves very clear wording in the IPID and highlighting as a kind of double check. Thanks for all the comments. I will now close this discussion.

By the nature of a IPID being typically 2 pages and a policybook often being 40+ pages its always going to be highly summerised. I cannot easily spot the post office's one but having looked at plenty in the past many will say that there is an exclusion for claims if the property is going to be unoccupied for more days than the value shown in your schedule. The same wording would work for the Post Office

tightauldgit

moneysaver128 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Smithcom said:

Just been in touch with Ageas customer services. They say no insurance for burst pipes if you are away UNDER 60 days/house unoccupied - ie on holiday. Seems different to other companies under 60 days approach?

That sounds likely to be a load of twaddle.  But you should investigate

Ask them to point you to:

1.   The policy definition of unoccupied
2.   This mysterious escape of water exclusion if you are on holiday

SC

Do you have a link to the policywording?

Looking at the current wording (https://www.postoffice.co.uk/dam/jcr:f3c6757e-9167-4345-9050-715d5481fd87/home-insurance-policy-booklet.pdf) it simply says these things are not insured if your property is Unoccupied(defined term). By definition for it to be Unoccupied it must be empty for 60 days and so it cannot apply if you are away under 60 days... however....

Unoccupied
By unoccupied, we mean that your home hasn’t been or won’t be lived in for more than 60 days in a row, or doesn’t contain enough furniture to be lived in. Regular visits to the home, or occasional overnight stays would not count as a break in this period.

If you’re planning on being away for more than 60 days in a row, please let us know. Just to be clear, when we use the word unoccupied under What’s not covered, we will apply this from the first day of when you plan to be away from your home. If you are unable to be at your home due to unforeseen or unexpected circumstances, we will apply this from day 61. Certain parts of your cover won’t be valid, even if the damage or loss you’re claiming for takes place in the first 60 days while you’re away

There is a difference between if this is a planned or unplanned being away from home, for a planned stay away then the unoccupied clause applys from day 1 whereas in some cases for an unplanned absence unoccupied wont start until day 61.

 It still seems to me that they are clearly saying No insurance for burst pipes vandals etc, if you are away under 60 days. Particularly the bit where it says - 'Certain parts of the cover will not be valid, even if the damage or loss you are claiming for takes place in the first 60 days while you are away.'

I may be incorrect but that's how I read this. I can't see how to read it otherwise.  I cannot see this endorsement in other policies as I have been looking carefully. Here is what Post Office/Ageas replied to my email:

Thank you for contacting Post Office Home Insurance. I hope you are well.

The following limitations would apply if the property is unoccupied.

Unoccupied Endorsement:

Please be aware that when a property has not been lived in for 60 days, an unoccupied endorsement is applied and this restricts the amount of cover provided by the policy

Our definition of unoccupied is that the home has not been or will not be lived in for more than 60 days in a row. Regular visits to the home, or occasional overnight stays do not count as a break in this period. The unoccupancy begins from the first day the home is empty, or if the home becomes empty due to unforeseen or unexpected circumstances, then the restrictions apply from day 61. Certain parts of the cover will not be valid, even if the damage or loss you are claiming for takes place in the first 60 days while you are away.

When your property is unoccupied, we will not pay for the following Building claims: 

-Vandalism 

-Leaking or freezing water and leaking oil 

-Theft

-Damaged glass, toilets and other fittings 

-Accidental damage

If no one is living in the property, neither we will not pay for the following Contents claims: 

-Vandalism

-Leaking or freezing water and leaking oil 

-Theft 

-Accidental damage to home entertainment equipment 

-Broken glass and ceramics 

-Loss or metered water or oil 

-Protection for tenants 

-Valuables -Money 

-Credit cards

-Accidental damage to your contents

The policy booklet explains the cover and exclusions in detail.

That reads fairly clearly to me that unoccupied means 'left empty for 60 days or more' so if you are away for up to 60 days you are covered, if you are away for more than that you aren't. Not sure what they've told you and if that is different but that whole section entitled 'Unoccupied Endorsement' only applies if you are away for 60 or more days. Its just that for some things the lack of cover starts on Day 61 and for others on Day 1.