Foster Clan

We were told to insure our belongings for the full replacement value of everything and then we paid a percentage of the total replacement value (I presume that's the norm)

Therefore I insured a five-year old three seater settee for £2000. The settee was damaged on arrival and irrepairable. After 11 months the insurance company have now offered me £750 saying they've allowed for depreciation. Is this the norm? How come I had to insure for full cost and paid a percentage on that amount. If I had known I could have saved a fortune on insurance by valuing everything based on depreciation value. I've dug out the insurance papers and can't see anything either way but the insurance company are sticking to their guns.

Anyone else had this?

Jo

Luma

That seems really unfair.

I was wondering how people have got along with claiming for damages as most insurance documents always seem to have so much small print.

herrchook

That sounds pretty off in my opinion. Are your insurers members of a professional body or is there an ombudsman you can complain too.

Thanks for raising this issue. Will be asking questions on this subject when we come to choose an insurer.

Hope you get it sorted.

Gill

Mark & Ali

Hi

Which shipping company did you use?

Ali

GinaUK

Hi,

sorry to hear about your troubles. I like the other poster's suggestion of Ombudsman and professional body. If you have a Citizen's Advice Bureau near you, you could ask them for help with that.

Also, could you please tell us which insurance company you used?

Thanks

Gina

Fardell

Like everyone else, I would like to know the name of the Insurance company - if it's British my guess is that you will have to dispute the issue in the UK. Not good!

I looked up my policy from an Oz insurer just for interest - the 5 year point is important. The policy provides (sic):

"It is in your interest to insure .. for full value. This means the cost of replacing with new items less an allowance for condition, age, wear and tear, for items over 5 years old" ...the Company will pay full replacement cost for any items ... provided that such items are not more than 5 years old.

This means I think, under this policy anyway, you only insure items > 5 years old for replacement less an allowance for wear, you then get the full, depreciated amount back. But at least you don't pay a premium based on the full replacement value.

So, in summary, moral of story is;

1) 5 year point seems important
2) please indicate insurer so that we can avoid them in future
3) probably better to go for an Oz insurer in case you get into a "scrap"

Good luck.

Luma

Who was the insurance company?

Foster Clan

Thanks for replies - I've sent a letter back to the insurance company but not holding out much hope - I've got nothing to lose.

The insurance company is AXA.


Jo

Fardell

That's very poor service from the world's 2nd largest insurer. If you arranged it through a broker I would also go back to them and ask them for assistance. Can I ask how much you paid as a percentage of value insured? Anything over 2% is too high, particularly given the apparent terms of your policy.

Jimclevs

Hi

We had to make a claim for some relatively minor breakages etc against Allied Pickfords through the marine insurance company they use - Vero Marine - I think.

We were required to submit photographic evidence with our claim together with our estimated replacement value of the items. There were a couple of items in there which we had "inherited" and we had no idea of replacement value as they were no longer made for the past 60 years so we gave a high guestimate of their "antique" value.

They settled our claim, in full, almost by return.

I have no problems with that.

Jim

Fardell

I wouldn't have thought so :-)... but one of the learning points is, I think, to use an Australian broker (or insurer) so you can complain face to face if something is not handled properly! It's too easy to ignore you from 12,000 miles and good ness knows how many kilometers.

Foster Clan

We paid 3.5% on valued goods of £31,500!!!!
I am so mad that we were told to insure at the full replacement value. The insurance company are now telling me that you have to put this figure down in case the container sinks and that is the only case when they would pay the figure you put down. They are quoting "due account is taken of the indemnity basis of the policy" saying this is not a policy of new for old. Can anyone shed any light on this?
Thanks
Joanne

Fardell

By "indemnifying" you are protecting someone against a loss - what they are saying (twice) is that your policy is indeed not "new for old" and they are only liable for the depreciated value of the item destoyed, lost etc., Looks like you got a cr*p policy which wasn't explained to you properly and you paid top dollar/GBP - I think someone said a British broker can provide it at around 1.5% and I know an Australian broker who can do it at 2.0%. 11 months responding to a claim is also cr*p and I would want some compensation.

Foster Clan

Thanks for that.
Do you know how they would have come to the figure of £750 from £2000. Do they have to use some sort of calculation or just pluck the figure from thin air? It's just that I have been in touch with the company who I bought the suite from and although they no longer sell the exact same suite they do have a similar one (of lesser quality though but the closest comparable one) which is £1095.
Thanks
Jo

Fardell

Sorry, can't tell you. My guess is that somewhere in the itsy bitsy fine print is provision for depreciation at "such and such a rate" once the article is over 5 years of age. If you straight line depreciate it over, say 10 years, and it's 6 years old then you would have a depreciated value of (40% x 2000) = 800 pounds which is close. But no doubt they have a formula that is wickedly, wickedly complicated ... but they should haveat least attempted to explain it to you on paper!