Argos TV repair - Accidental Damage Cover Experiences

black_hawk84

I am a very busy parent as kids are mostly playing indoors. I bought a new TV few months ago and added accidental damage cover paind upfront.

Today I woke up and went downstairs and kids informed me TV is broken as they were playing soft ball games and accidently hit TV.

Please can you guide will this be covered under accidental damage and anyone have had a good/bad experience. 

Thanks

Phoenix72

Without seeing your policy document, difficult to say but I would expect it to be covered. However how much is the tv worth and what is the excess?

Aylesbury_Duck

I think it will be covered, but there's an excess of between £10 and £100 to pay, which seems to apply on a sliding scale, so I'd assume a TV would be at the upper part of that range.  They also don't cover the costs of installation or disposal of the old TV.

You need to read your policy document to check, and then call them.  

HillStreetBlues

Looks like max £50 excess.

PHK

It’s going to depend on the kids. If they are are very young, you might be considered to have not taken care of the TV by leaving them alone with it then damage was bound to happen. Similarly if they are teenagers then they would have known better to play ball games indoors and that an accident was likely. 

Aylesbury_Duck

PHK said:

It’s going to depend on the kids. If they are are very young, you might be considered to have not taken care of the TV by leaving them alone with it then damage was bound to happen. Similarly if they are teenagers then they would have known better to play ball games indoors and that an accident was likely. 

That would mean the policy would only cover accidental damage by children between, say five and twelve years old.  Seems a bit odd, but I agree that it will come down to how OP describes the circumstances.

RefluentBeans

Aylesbury_Duck said:

PHK said:

It’s going to depend on the kids. If they are are very young, you might be considered to have not taken care of the TV by leaving them alone with it then damage was bound to happen. Similarly if they are teenagers then they would have known better to play ball games indoors and that an accident was likely. 

That would mean the policy would only cover accidental damage by children between, say five and twelve years old.  Seems a bit odd, but I agree that it will come down to how OP describes the circumstances.

‘The kids were playing in the living room and one threw a ball and knocked the telly off the stand’ 

‘how old are the kids’ 

‘10 and 12’ 

‘Ah sorry - computer says no. We only cover up to 11’ 

HillStreetBlues

RefluentBeans said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

PHK said:

It’s going to depend on the kids. If they are are very young, you might be considered to have not taken care of the TV by leaving them alone with it then damage was bound to happen. Similarly if they are teenagers then they would have known better to play ball games indoors and that an accident was likely. 

That would mean the policy would only cover accidental damage by children between, say five and twelve years old.  Seems a bit odd, but I agree that it will come down to how OP describes the circumstances.

‘The kids were playing in the living room and one threw a ball and knocked the telly off the stand’ 

‘how old are the kids’ 

‘10 and 12’ 

‘Ah sorry - computer says no. We only cover up to 11’ 

The 10 year old broke it

Malthusian

PHK said:

It’s going to depend on the kids. If they are are very young, you might be considered to have not taken care of the TV by leaving them alone with it then damage was bound to happen. Similarly if they are teenagers then they would have known better to play ball games indoors and that an accident was likely. 

I am not seeing anything in Argos' policy conditions which allow them to exclude a claim for accidental damage on that basis. Which part are you looking at?

Ergates

PHK said:

It’s going to depend on the kids. If they are are very young, you might be considered to have not taken care of the TV by leaving them alone with it then damage was bound to happen. Similarly if they are teenagers then they would have known better to play ball games indoors and that an accident was likely. 

That would be a pointless policy condition as it would be impossible to prove.  Damage from young kids is only covered if you're in the room?  What if you leave the room for 30 seconds to get them a snack?  What if you're in the room by are asleep?  What if you're in the room but have your back turned?  What if you're not in the room but you can see into the room?

PHK

Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear or you’ve all skimread. 😁

The question is whether it’s an accident. It’s not just something that’s unintentional. By definition an accident is also something that is unforeseen. Leaving a very small child unsupervised it’s foreseeable that damage will occur. 

There’s also a duty of care in insured persons. Eg. No reasonable person would play ball games indoors where there are breakables. 

There’s plenty of FOS decisions if anyone wants to look at how this is interpreted.