LV student theft claim rejected

Austinhead

My son lives in a shared uni house (private tenancy), he went out the other night and the front door was locked. Another tenant unlocked the door and there were people in the house and in the kitchen. Unfortunately some lowlife walked into the house, into my son's room and stole some of his possessions. The police were called and subsequently they found, arrested and charged the guy, but my son's possessions were not recovered (around £800 worth of clothes, gaming console and games).
I made a claim under my LV policy as I have cover away from home at university but they have rejected it as there is a clause that states he is only covered for theft if there was forced entry.
I have objected to this, explaining the house was secured when he left and he can't be held responsible for someone else leaving it unlocked. They then went on to say it's because his room was left unlocked and that was a stipulation on the policy (it isn't, there is very little around cover at uni and only around forced entry). I realise this was an oversight on his part, but since he is living with friends, this still feels like he is being punished.
Do I have any comeback on this? I am not in a position to replace his stolen items and neither is he. Thanks.

400ixl

They would certainly have an expectation that his room was secured if there is a lock on it. If he didn't lock his door and only the front communal door then you may have an uphill battle unfortunately.

It is certainly in the terms of my home insurance which has the university away from home clause and we have always instilled in our daughter that if see is not in her shared flat that the door must be locked (fortunately its an electronic lock so will always self lock). 

All you can do is raise a complaint and when you get to deadlock got to the ombudsman if you feel you have a case.

LightFlare

Austinhead said:

My son lives in a shared uni house (private tenancy), he went out the other night and the front door was locked. Another tenant unlocked the door and there were people in the house and in the kitchen. Unfortunately some lowlife walked into the house, into my son's room and stole some of his possessions. The police were called and subsequently they found, arrested and charged the guy, but my son's possessions were not recovered (around £800 worth of clothes, gaming console and games).
I made a claim under my LV policy as I have cover away from home at university but they have rejected it as there is a clause that states he is only covered for theft if there was forced entry.
I have objected to this, explaining the house was secured when he left and he can't be held responsible for someone else leaving it unlocked. They then went on to say it's because his room was left unlocked and that was a stipulation on the policy (it isn't, there is very little around cover at uni and only around forced entry). I realise this was an oversight on his part, but since he is living with friends, this still feels like he is being punished.
Do I have any comeback on this? I am not in a position to replace his stolen items and neither is he. Thanks.

pressure that person to compensate - although they probably are under no legal obligation to do anything

pramsay13

I think you will struggle and anyway I'm not sure it will be worth it. 
How much is the excess? 
£800 sounds a lot for some clothes and games unless they are particularly fancy or there were a lot of them. 
What is the 2nd hand value of £800 worth of clothes and equipment?
Even if you did claim it's possible your premium will go up next year. 
Encourage him to get a lock for his own door and chalk it up to experience. 

Teapot55

I thought landlords were obliged to provide individual locks on every tenant’s door in homes of multiple occupation? Possibly if the tenants have rented the place jointly it’s different? 

A warning for all of us with young people in our lives though. 

ButterCheese

I was of the understanding that shared houses needed individual locks on each bedroom door.  I had it in all my shared houses at Uni (and that was 25 years ago).  You could get hold of the landlord and ensure locks are fitted but this won't get your son's possessions or losses back.

With regard to the claim, as you have already made a claim and thus made LV aware, you might as well question it if it's not specifically written in the covering contract that individual doors must be locked.

Buy his stuff again (2nd hand) if he really needs it.  Not particularly his fault, but also a hard lesson that if locks are absent on doors then he should be insisting that the landlord fits them.

I don't expect you to get any further, as the police have already been called and confirmed there was no lock on your son's door.  You can try though, you don't have much to lose

DullGreyGuy

Austinhead said:

My son lives in a shared uni house (private tenancy), he went out the other night and the front door was locked. Another tenant unlocked the door and there were people in the house and in the kitchen. Unfortunately some lowlife walked into the house, into my son's room and stole some of his possessions. The police were called and subsequently they found, arrested and charged the guy, but my son's possessions were not recovered (around £800 worth of clothes, gaming console and games).
I made a claim under my LV policy as I have cover away from home at university but they have rejected it as there is a clause that states he is only covered for theft if there was forced entry.
I have objected to this, explaining the house was secured when he left and he can't be held responsible for someone else leaving it unlocked. They then went on to say it's because his room was left unlocked and that was a stipulation on the policy (it isn't, there is very little around cover at uni and only around forced entry). I realise this was an oversight on his part, but since he is living with friends, this still feels like he is being punished.
Do I have any comeback on this? I am not in a position to replace his stolen items and neither is he. Thanks.

It is common for all policies to have a requirement of forced or violent entry when people that aren't family are living together, on some budget policies is even required for families too. The problem otherwise is your flatmate could "borrow" something and you report it to your insurers as theft etc. 

Ultimately it's highly unlikely you'll get anywhere. 

Whilst most Home insurance is new for old most policies aren't so for clothing so unless it was all brand new then it's likely the clothing element would have been written down anyway. 

Teapot55 said:

I thought landlords were obliged to provide individual locks on every tenant’s door in homes of multiple occupation? Possibly if the tenants have rented the place jointly it’s different?

I certainly dont believe it's the case for joint tenants; certainly I've rented many places over the years and non-had locks on each door (ironically the first home we bought does but no keys)

dunstonh

I made a claim under my LV policy as I have cover away from home at university but they have rejected it as there is a clause that states he is only covered for theft if there was forced entry.

That is a normal clause for student accommodation.

I have objected to this, explaining the house was secured when he left and he can't be held responsible for someone else leaving it unlocked. 

Why did you buy it in the first place if you object to the clause that was in there from the start?  (not that you would have a lot of choice if you shopped around)

 They then went on to say it's because his room was left unlocked and that was a stipulation on the policy (it isn't, there is very little around cover at uni and only around forced entry). I realise this was an oversight on his part, but since he is living with friends, this still feels like he is being punished.

It's not punishment. It's a good life experience to learn about things you buy and don't assume, though.

Do I have any comeback on this?

Cannot see any reason why you would.   There is no wrongdoing here. 

Teapot55

DullGreyGuy said

I certainly dont believe it's the case for joint tenants; certainly I've rented many places over the years and non-had locks on each door (ironically the first home we bought does but no keys)

I must say our first place decades ago was half a house with another young couple renting upstairs. No locks on any of the doors apart from the external ones. 

The possibility of them having ‘dodgy’ visitors or a party without us knowing would never have occurred to us at that age. 

k12479

Austinhead said:

My son lives in a shared uni house...the house was secured when he left and he can't be held responsible for someone else leaving it unlocked.

Sorry, but he does bear some responsibility. He chose the people to live with.

cw8825

k12479 said:

Austinhead said:

My son lives in a shared uni house...the house was secured when he left and he can't be held responsible for someone else leaving it unlocked.

Sorry, but he does bear some responsibility. He chose the people to live with.

fairly cynical thought

what was he meant to do, security vet each housemate