Botang Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Thats not fair at all, as others have said the theif got what was coming to him and fortunately for all of us he didn't hurt anyone else in the process other than his own family. Its not as if he hadn't had fair warning having just been released from prison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shao_khan Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Wow.. according to as.net the insurance didn't pay out either! Shocking! Really - how did they get out of that one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shark_90 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Really - how did they get out of that one? He says that it was because his car wasn't garaged on the night of the incident.. his car was blocking his parents' cars in as they were on holiday or something. Either way, I can't believe they got out of it, unless it's still ongoing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS3 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 eerr, lets see..... Where was the car parked ? - On the drive. Insurance company reply - Sorry, you told us it was parked in the garage. We repuidate your claim. Pretty straightforward I reckon. (if you tell the insurance company something,make sure you do it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shark_90 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 eerr, lets see.....Where was the car parked ? - On the drive. Insurance company reply - Sorry, you told us it was parked in the garage. We repuidate your claim. Pretty straightforward I reckon. (if you tell the insurance company something,make sure you do it) Well not really. When I insured my car this time around it was about 2 weeks before I moved house. The difference in price was astronomical (like, nearly double) so they insured the car at the NEW address as that's where I'd be for the majority of the year of insurance. Edit - before anyone says anything that was the decision of the underwriter. What about if you were parked outside your girlfriend's house when it was stolen? "Oh sorry sir you said it would be in your garage at night so we're not going to pay out." I don't think so, do you? What if you couldn't get in the garage for whatever reason... driveway being redone or similar? I could understand them not paying out if it was parked on the road and you didn't even have a garage.. or your garage wasn't useable or something.. but not if it's not in there temporarily for whatever reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 My policy says "normally garaged" and all my policies for the last 9 years have said the same. If the owner said it was normally garaged and it isn't then it's fair enough. I'm sure many people do this and it's not fair on those that genuinely do garage their cars. If it was left out for one night then it seems harsh and in my case wouldn't exclude it from being insured. I guess it's all down to what you've agreed to. p.s. Thieving scumbag :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS3 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Well not really. When I insured my car this time around it was about 2 weeks before I moved house. The difference in price was astronomical (like, nearly double) so they insured the car at the NEW address as that's where I'd be for the majority of the year of insurance. Edit - before anyone says anything that was the decision of the underwriter.What about if you were parked outside your girlfriend's house when it was stolen? "Oh sorry sir you said it would be in your garage at night so we're not going to pay out." I don't think so, do you? What if you couldn't get in the garage for whatever reason... driveway being redone or similar? I could understand them not paying out if it was parked on the road and you didn't even have a garage.. or your garage wasn't useable or something.. but not if it's not in there temporarily for whatever reason. So you told the insurer, and it was their decison to let you put the new risk address on the documents. All sorted, no issue. They were informed. And it it was parked outside your girlfriends house, of course its covered. Just like it would be if you were stayin in a hotel. However, if on your schedule, which is where you car is "normally" kept, you state its in a garage, thats where it needs to be. If you cant get in your garage, temporrary or not, you have an obligation to tell the insurer, its just common sense. The risk has changed. His parents were on holiday, so used his car to keep theirs blocked in.....and then left the patio door unlocked. If you were the insurer and you'd taken a (possible) £700 premium for that risk, would you really happily pay up to £10k for a subsequent loss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mollox Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Matt, are you therefore saying that if you tell your insurance company that a car is "normally" kept in a garage then its not covered anywhere else overnight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Matt, are you therefore saying that if you tell your insurance company that a car is "normally" kept in a garage then its not covered anywhere else overnight? No, he's saying that if the car is at home, it needs to be in the garage. It is of course, covered when parked elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponge Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) There must be more to it. Just because your car wasn't garaged on that particular night doesn't mean your policy is automatically void. It's my understanding it's where it's normally, on the whole, most of the time, kept that matters. So if on one occasion it wasn't there, they can't just void the policy. Now if they had evidence that it wasn't normally kept in the garage, e.g. you didn't have one, or it was inaccessible, then sure, void the policy. I would definitely be arguing that one. Edited April 7, 2009 by Sponge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Maybe it was the fact that he left the patio doors unlocked (if that is true). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeNobody Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Maybe it was the fact that he left the patio doors unlocked (if that is true). Apparently that's how the Police got in to the house. Not sure if it's how the thieves got in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brabus Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 No, he's saying that if the car is at home, it needs to be in the garage. It is of course, covered when parked elsewhere. Which is fair enough really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipex Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Apparently that's how the Police got in to the house. Not sure if it's how the thieves got in. Which you could argue was left open by the thieves leaving, at least thats what I'd do anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeNobody Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Which you could argue was left open by the thieves leaving, at least thats what I'd do anyway! True, but then they'd be looking for the original area of forced access, and there wouldn't be one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigyb Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I think what most companys are saying is that if they get your keys cos a window or door was left open, then they will not payout. This was mentioned during the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizbit Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) Well my A8 doesn't fit in my garage (unlike my previous 5 series), which i was a bit p*ssed off about, as i didn't think it was that much bigger , so it is now parked on my drive. I have told the insurance company this expecting my premium to skyrocket, and they said "no problem", updated my policy schedule and that was it. No extra charge. I might have been lucky, but it's worth telling them in case the worst happens Edited April 7, 2009 by Wizbit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonC Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 And it it was parked outside your girlfriends house, of course its covered. Just like it would be if you were stayin in a hotel. However, if on your schedule, which is where you car is "normally" kept, you state its in a garage, thats where it needs to be.If you cant get in your garage, temporrary or not, you have an obligation to tell the insurer, its just common sense. The risk has changed. That's ridiculous, Matt. If a car is "usually insured for garage stowage", then the insurers can't be expected to be informed each time it's not, as they've insured the car against a car "usually" stored in a garage. On this ocassion, it wasn't, but it still falls into the category of "usually". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS3 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 I might have been lucky, but it's worth telling them in case the worst happens Spot on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 True, but then they'd be looking for the original area of forced access, and there wouldn't be one... If it was a euro cylinder lock and the thief used a "bump" key there wouldn't necessarily be a sign of forced entry. My wife is a SOCO for the police and the b8stards are using these more and more. Only two ways to stop them, get some Pickbuster fluid or change the cylinders to Mul T Lock ones :punched: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonC Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 If it was a euro cylinder lock and the thief used a "bump" key there wouldn't necessarily be a sign of forced entry. My wife is a SOCO for the police and the b8stards are using these more and more. Only two ways to stop them, get some Pickbuster fluid or change the cylinders to Mul T Lock ones :punched: That's very informative, Booster What's a SOCO, Pickbuster fluid and MUL T Locks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizbit Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 Or a bump key for that matter?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mollox Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 SOCO - Scene of Crime Officer Pickbuster - Could be anything knowing Booster MUL T Lock - cheap kinky handcuffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shark_90 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 This bump key thing is very popular actually, see here: Lock bumping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Quite easy really, scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS3 Posted April 7, 2009 Report Share Posted April 7, 2009 (edited) That's ridiculous, Matt. Yep, that ridiculous, they've repudiated the claim..... This can get silly, without knowing all the details, its tricky to understand 100% and really fully understand why it has been repudiated. The insurance company (loss adjustors/claims investigators) must have a genuine reason(s) to repudiate, I guess only they will know why they have for sure. (I've worked in insurance for 10 years, some of that time in claims. You'd be amazed at what people sometimes fail to disclose) Not saying that in this case there has been any non disclosure, I'm only hypothesising with the details contained in the thread. I'd also add, if the keys had been stolen, and nothing else was out of order in terms of the suitability of the garage for being able to be used for the storage of the car, (ie the garage was empty on the night in question and not full with lawnmowers and pedal cycles), then yes, the settlement in this case would seem to have been very harsh in my personal opinion. Do we know who the insurer was? Edited April 7, 2009 by MattS3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now