Gatesafe insurance - disappointing

jade2612

I have Gatesafe home and contents insurance, I paid for the extra extension covers including accidental damage building and accidental damage contents insurance. My son accidentally left the tap running before leaving for a bike ride and flooded our downstairs, it was left for hours before discovery. We were able to get things dried quickly after discovery, however the electrical appliances in the kitchen were not able to be used as they all had water enter them. In addition, the kitchen cupboards and units were also water damaged.

I filed a claim with Gatesafe as we have accidental damage cover which states ‘cover yourself against moments of clumsiness at home”. It also used the example of  “breaking a window with a bad kick to drilling through a water pipe”. The list of exclusions didn’t say excluding water damage from taps left running. However this exclusions was in the basic home and contents insurance, hence we choose to pay extra for accidental damage as we have two kids. 

After filing our claim we got an email stating that we weren’t covered. After further conversations we discovered that the accidental damage has a clause that states that accidental damage doesn’t cover any exclusions outlined in section 1-8 of the standard building and contents cover (the basic policy before additional add ons).

So to clarify, the accidental cover, is pointless because anything that the standard normal home and contents insurance excludes is also excluded in the accidental cover by using the exclusion wording of;

“loss or damage which is specifically excluded from covers 1 to 10 under Section 7 (building cover);"

Or 

“loss or damage specifically excluded under covers 1 to 10 in this Section 8 (contents cover);"

I am not a solicitor and I do my very best to read all my insurance documents when I am up for renewal and deciding which one to use. This one on paper looked very good with all the additional add ons and I felt safe that I was covered for any eventuality. However this has not been the case, we are now left with no electrical kitchen appliances, a damp water damaged kitchen and home insurance that is as useless as a chocolate tea pot. 

I am now currently in the process of complaining and if still no further forward I will be continuing this process to the Financial Ombudsman Service as I do believe the wording on this policy is very misleading. I am not hopeful of any resolution. I just hope that my story can prevent others from using this insurance in the first place.

I WOULD NOT recommend Gatesafe insurance if my life depended on it. Insurance is there for times of crisis and they have made this even more stressful than I ever could have imagined. I don’t have the financial means to replace all these items on top of the cost of living crisis and interest rates being so ridiculous. 

DullGreyGuy

Do you have a link to the policy book? Can't even find the website for the company!

jade2612

DullGreyGuy said:

Do you have a link to the policy book? Can't even find the website for the company!

Hi sorry I can’t find a link I only have the policy on an app on my phone. But Iv screenshotted these. First is where it says anything excluded from covers 1-10 under section 7. And the second screenshot of the exclusions list in section 7 which is your basic home building insurance. So why pay extra if all the exclusions included in the basic still arnt covered in the add on. 

Hope this makes sense. If you can provide me clarity on the issue that would be great. It just isn’t adding up, why would I pay extra if it still excludes all the same exclusions. And even what it says it does cover isn’t specific. 

Aretnap

jade2612 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Do you have a link to the policy book? Can't even find the website for the company!

Hi sorry I can’t find a link I only have the policy on an app on my phone. But Iv screenshotted these. First is where it says anything excluded from covers 1-10 under section 7. And the second screenshot of the exclusions list in section 7 which is your basic home building insurance. So why pay extra if all the exclusions included in the basic still arnt covered in the add on. 

Hope this makes sense. If you can provide me clarity on the issue that would be great. It just isn’t adding up, why would I pay extra if it still excludes all the same exclusions. And even what it says it does cover isn’t specific. 

There should be a definition of "accidental damage" under a list of terms somewhere which makes what it does cover more specific.

The fact that things which are excluded from the basic policy are excluded from the accidental damage section doesn't make the accidental damage section worthless - it still adds cover for quite a lot of things which aren't covered by the basic policy.

Usually home insurance is written on an "insured peril" basis which means the policy is defined primarily by a list of things that it does cover - rather than a list of things that it doesn't cover. So you have sections for fire, flood, storm damage, subsidence, escape of water and so on - and if you want to claim for something you have to say which section it's covered under. Exclusions might go on to fine-tune the list of things that are covered - "Storm damage, but not storm damage to your satellite dish" etc - but something has to be on the list of perils before the exclusions even becomes relevant.

So imagine you had a basic policy and your child kicked a ball through a window, or you put your foot through the ceiling while you were in the loft. Those things aren't fire damage, or storm damage, or flood damage etc so they're not covered by the basic policy - not because of exclusions but because they're not on the list of insured perils in the first place. They are certainly accidental damage though, and they're presumably not excluded under the fire, flood or storm sections, so they would be covered under the accidental damage section.

Your problem here is that there's an overlap between the sections which is a little unusual - leaving a tap running could be considered either escape of water or accidental damage - and the policy terms seem to prevent the accidental damage section overlapping with other sections, by insisting that the exclusions to the escape of water section also apply to the accidental damage section. That seems a bit rubbish, but I'm not quite sure how you'd argue that it's inherently unfair. Your best argument might be that you reasonably expect the AD section to be quite wide ranging, more so than other sections, and that therefore the term should have been highlighted more clearly. I'm not sure that it's that strong an argument though - probably not very people are specifically worrying about what happens when a tap is left running (out of all the things that might go wrong with your home) when they're buying a policy so the insurer might argue that it's not a key or very important term which needs highlighting.

jade2612

Aretnap said:

jade2612 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Do you have a link to the policy book? Can't even find the website for the company!

Hi sorry I can’t find a link I only have the policy on an app on my phone. But Iv screenshotted these. First is where it says anything excluded from covers 1-10 under section 7. And the second screenshot of the exclusions list in section 7 which is your basic home building insurance. So why pay extra if all the exclusions included in the basic still arnt covered in the add on. 

Hope this makes sense. If you can provide me clarity on the issue that would be great. It just isn’t adding up, why would I pay extra if it still excludes all the same exclusions. And even what it says it does cover isn’t specific. 

There should be a definition of "accidental damage" under a list of terms somewhere which makes what it does cover more specific.

The fact that things which are excluded from the basic policy are excluded from the accidental damage section doesn't make the accidental damage section worthless - it still adds cover for quite a lot of things which aren't covered by the basic policy.

Usually home insurance is written on an "insured peril" basis which means the policy is defined primarily by a list of things that it does cover - rather than a list of things that it doesn't cover. So you have sections for fire, flood, storm damage, subsidence, escape of water and so on - and if you want to claim for something you have to say which section it's covered under. Exclusions might go on to fine-tune the list of things that are covered - "Storm damage, but not storm damage to your satellite dish" etc - but something has to be on the list of perils before the exclusions even becomes relevant.

So imagine you had a basic policy and your child kicked a ball through a window, or you put your foot through the ceiling while you were in the loft. Those things aren't fire damage, or storm damage, or flood damage etc so they're not covered by the basic policy - not because of exclusions but because they're not on the list of insured perils in the first place. They are certainly accidental damage though, and they're presumably not excluded under the fire, flood or storm sections, so they would be covered under the accidental damage section.

Your problem here is that there's an overlap between the sections which is a little unusual - leaving a tap running could be considered either escape of water or accidental damage - and the policy terms seem to prevent the accidental damage section overlapping with other sections, by insisting that the exclusions to the escape of water section also apply to the accidental damage section. That seems a bit rubbish, but I'm not quite sure how you'd argue that it's inherently unfair. Your best argument might be that you reasonably expect the AD section to be quite wide ranging, more so than other sections, and that therefore the term should have been highlighted more clearly. I'm not sure that it's that strong an argument though - probably not very people are specifically worrying about what happens when a tap is left running (out of all the things that might go wrong with your home) when they're buying a policy so the insurer might argue that it's not a key or very important term which needs highlighting.

Thanks for your reply iv went to the definitions to determine what they say accidental damage is and here is what it says: do you think this helps me any? 

jade2612

Can I ask you to clarify this part as well please. See when you said “but something has to be on the list of perils before the exclusions even becomes relevant”. Under the accidental damage part it doesn’t state what it does cover just a list of exclusions. Does that help me either? 

DullGreyGuy

jade2612 said:

Can I ask you to clarify this part as well please. See when you said “but something has to be on the list of perils before the exclusions even becomes relevant”. Under the accidental damage part it doesn’t state what it does cover just a list of exclusions. Does that help me either? 

Accidental Damage is in bold text which means it is a defined term, there should be a definitions section to the policybook (often its right after the table of contents or right at the end).  The section states it covers AD and so you need to read what they define AD as... normally its something like a sudden non-deliberate damage caused by an outside force that excludes breakdown and wear & tear. 

jade2612 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Do you have a link to the policy book? Can't even find the website for the company!

Hi sorry I can’t find a link I only have the policy on an app on my phone. But Iv screenshotted these. First is where it says anything excluded from covers 1-10 under section 7. And the second screenshot of the exclusions list in section 7 which is your basic home building insurance. So why pay extra if all the exclusions included in the basic still arnt covered in the add on. 

Hope this makes sense. If you can provide me clarity on the issue that would be great. It just isn’t adding up, why would I pay extra if it still excludes all the same exclusions. And even what it says it does cover isn’t specific. 

AD cover is intended to unwind the exclusions under the other perils but to add a whole new class of peril to be covered. Accidentally knock a glass of red wine off the coffee table and stain your sofa and carpet wouldnt be covered by your policy at all as its not Flood or Fire etc however by adding the AD section it now does cover this.

These terms are a little more restrictive than most insurers have but that doesnt make them illegal or unenforceable as long as the wording is clear and your average person could understand them. Ultimately there is little harm in putting in a complaint but I wouldnt expect it to be upheld.