Whilst on holiday, staying in a privately owned apartment, the apartment was burgled during the night whilst we slept there. Amongst other things, our wedding rings were stolen. We have annual European travel insurance with Moneysupermarket. On our return we found that the terms and conditions of our policy buried in Section 5, 11b, "loss, destruction, damage or theft of the following property, watches and jewellery (unless as a result of mugging or any form of physical violence to you)."
To me this exclusion seems unreasonable. All the other baggage exclusions seems to be either careless/illegal or specialist equipment related. However, this exclusion seems to imply that one should be wearing jewellery and watch all the time. I'd maintain that this exclusion is very significant and if I'd noticed when I read the term and conditions then I'd have taken a different policy. Do I have grounds for complaint that this exclusion was both buried and in addition is unreasonable?
Why were you not wearing your wedding rings? These are usually one of the things that you do wear all the time surely? Maybe I am wrong. I have been married for 17 years and have only taken my wedding ring off once (when I had my 2nd child as my hands got so swollen it became impossible to wear).
Does seem a little harsh of the Insurance company though!
Check your home and contents home insurance policy it may cover your wedding rings.
I'm sure many people wear their rings all the time but equally I'm sure many tack them off at night! Both my wife and I do take them off.
It seems to me like a ridiculous exclusion and therefore I'm hoping it could be deemed unfair/unreasonable. I think that at the very least it should be highlighted on the "important facts" list on either on the policy or the web page where I booked. I'd say that the policy was certainly not fit for purpose.
PS And no its not covered by my contents insurance
ANyway have a good read next time, cant see you getting anything though as it was in the contract and you will have agreed or signed.
Good Luck anyway
Although one thing we did when my husband lost his wedding ring in the sea (it happened a week to the day and hour after we got married!), as our insurance providers wouldn't cover us for items lost in the sea, we accidently forgot to tell the police and insurance company that it was lost in the sea and accidently said it was lost "walking around".
Of course, when we remembered our error, we informed the police in Blanes and the insurance company and gave them the money back that they sent us.
The important thing here is "Terms and Conditions". They have not mis-applied their T&Cs, and they haven't unreasonably refused settlement, and they didn't suddenly find a clause you didn't know about. It was clearly stated in the policy document; you didn't read it when you got it- or if you did, you didn't query what you felt to be unfair - until you needed to claim under the section that had something you feel is unfair.
Everyone needs to understand the Ombudsman is NOT the "People's Champion" - just because you don't like the answer you get to your complaint doesnt mean it's a wrong answer. Only if it IS a wrong answer can the Ombudsman help.
Changes to the laws governing the sale of what is termed "general insurance" came into effect in January. Certain sales of travel insurance are covered by the changes - a sale by a travel agent as a "bolt on" to a holiday sale is, however, not covered by the new rules.
Even if this sale was made after the new regulations came into force, I don't think the exclusion you are concerned about would have to be highlighted in either the Initial Disclosure Document OR the Key Facts Document.
There have been a lot of posts on the forums about insurance problems recently - it's certainly made me think about the policy we have and whether it covers what we think it should or not. I am going to be very careful about who we take our next annual policy out with.
Post a Reply
Please sign in or register an account to reply to this post.