Insurance & garage payout refusal

General scooter chat, any scooter related non technical info.
timexit17
registered user
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
Contact:

Not me, thank god. But I do feel for the chap in scootering letters this month.

i.e. a garaged policy same as most of us will have, bike left locked but outside for not every long at all gets pinched and the insurance say ' sorry no payout'.

Now fairs fair: the policy says bike has to be garaged, so they aren't any obligation to even consider a payout.

It's an eye opener for many of us when we realise even washing your bike and walking in for a pee or to answer the 'phone is a no-no.

However,
I don't really like or accept the insurance spokespersons comments:
i.e. 'that 'you get the discount for being garaged, so garaged it must be'

a) the discount isn't usually a massive percentage
b) many classics can't get agreed value without being garaged anyway (and if you think they'll pay out anywhere near a replacement value without it being agreed in advance you are a dreamer).

Even more of an insult when you have almost no chance of the police doing anything more than recording the theft in a book.

I have to say that this doesn't give the message you should be honest with your insurers -i.e. if this bloke had declared the bike pinched from another location or that the garage had been broken into -he'd have been paid out, after all it's not like the police are going to check is it?

I'm not advocating fraud- anymore than the insurers could claim that such draconian interpretation of garaged policies is 'reasonable' of course.
Daggs
registered user
Posts: 776
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 1:23 pm
Location: Addington Kent
Contact:

My policy asks is the machine in a locked garage overnight. Which it is.
timexit17
registered user
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
Contact:

Which one have you got Daggs?
Mines FJ on the classics and I can't remember what the autos on.

Definitely worth me checking the small print I think!
hat
registered user
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 7:19 pm
Main scooter: SX150/ Mugello 186
Contact:

I had a previous policy that stated it had to be secured as well as being in the garage so i have a ground anchor and chain in there. My current policy states that if its within a mile of the garage, but not actually in there, then its not covered for theft or damage. This means that like the letter, if its left on the drive or keb outside the house then its not insured
timexit17
registered user
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
Contact:

Yes, hat I've just checked my FJ classic policy which is the same although only 10pm-6am for garaged.
i.e. if it's pinched within a mile of my garage at those times then it isn't covered for theft.

I'm guessing the scootering chap was both unlucky to have such a draconian policy and in that he hadn't realised that was a condition -if you see what I mean?
User avatar
Muttley McLadd
registered user
Posts: 1496
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:32 pm
Contact:

What's the discount? If it's less than £100.. It must be worth paying the extra.
CakeAndArseParty
timexit17
registered user
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
Contact:

I'd agree Muttley, in fact I was saying the same yesterday. The difference is with classic policies -no garage= no agreed value.
Tractorman
registered user
Posts: 5167
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:21 pm
Main scooter: Lambretta li150 special
Location: Lincoln
Contact:

Have you considered the insurance ombudsman, sometimes time these clauses insurance companies put in are over ruled by them because the are in some circumstances unreasonable. My son had his bike stolen whilst on his paper round and they would not pay out because the insurance stated it must be locked whilst unattended. I complained to the ombudsman and he ruled it was unreasonable to lock his cycle every time he left it. Your case sound similar.
compass
registered user
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 7:02 pm
Contact:

Tractorman wrote: Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:13 am Have you considered the insurance ombudsman, sometimes time these clauses insurance companies put in are over ruled by them because the are in some circumstances unreasonable. My son had his bike stolen whilst on his paper round and they would not pay out because the insurance stated it must be locked whilst unattended. I complained to the ombudsman and he ruled it was unreasonable to lock his cycle every time he left it. Your case sound similar.
I agree, its a good call, however I would suggest you make an official complaint to the insurance company first, making it short , concise, and what you expect to be a reasonable outcome. They must reply in 8 weeks(FOS standards) and then if you are not happy with the outcome you should go to the Financial Ombudsman Service. IF you are still not happy you are perfectly within your rights to then take the matter to a small claims court. On averages they are more likely to agree with the ombudsman, however not a lot to lose and why not?

Insurance companies will always take advantage of any grey areas and they will often consider us as ignorant of our rights, so stand up and fight for common sense and some fairness.

They get away with this too often!

Mr Angry from sunny Hastings :lol:

Compass 8-)
timexit17
registered user
Posts: 278
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:01 pm
Main scooter: GP 225 Extra S type
Contact:

Obviously it's not me, but I'd agree that legally there may be an unenforceable clause.
I just hope the scootering letter writer didn't let it lie at what his insurance co told him.
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests