When is a fire not a fire??

[Steve L]

According to my son's partner's insurers a mechanical fire is not a fire, therefore not payable out on.

Their freelander had an engine bay fire, which apparently was due to a fractured diesel line thus the technicality of a mechanical fire.

Me being nieve thought, where there's flames there's fire !!!

Being insured fully comprehensive covers fire, so short of dropping a match in the tank, all risks should of been covered as a natuaral occurrance. I,E, not vandalisum or a deliberate act to claim insurance.

So yet again one does have to wonder just what we pay insurance for.

Steve L.

 

[Dustydog]

Hi Steve

Does the policy use the words" mechanical fire" and define what they mean?

If you want me to check the policy wording e-mail me a copy via Mr Mods.

Cheers

Dustydog

 

[FionaandJohn]

Hi Dustydog,

Do you think you should check Wikipedia for the "correct" definition???

Cheers

John

 

[Steve L]

The policy doesn't specifically state that as a clause, dusty.

But they do guard against it using the term, they will not cover "non accidental occurrances". I would of taken that to mean a deliberate act of setting fire to the vehicle. Not a part that fails through wear and tear that as a concequence and without previous notice ( on going rattling etc)caused the fire. Diesel injector pipes make no noise when they are about to split. I had a VW LT35 that did the same, but with the engine undr the cab and the engine cover in the cab, you smelt diesel before you got to the flame stage.

Luckily for them, they had just dropped off the horse trailer, otherwise they would of had two distraught horses to deal with as well.

Steve L.

 

[Dustydog]

Steve

I'd challenge the Insurers decision .

Ask for chapter and verse, how and where in the policy wording the claim fails.

An Insurer in contract cannot import new words and meanings to phrases that were not made known to you at inception.

John & Fiona had exactly that problem! Can you believe an Insurer suggesting the definitions in their policy are governed by Wikipedia rather than English Law??

Don't give in.

Cheers

Dustydog

 

[ProfJohnL]

I agree fully with dusty Dog on this one.

It the same as when an insurer refuses a towing claim if tow ratio is more than 85% even though the tow car is rated by the manufacture to tow more than 100%.

Any such limitation that narrows the scope of a claim to being less than the legal limits, must be clearly stated in the terms and conditions supplied when the policy is taken out.

Don't forget that most policies only last for a year, and technically when you renew it is a new policy and subject to the terms and conditions notified at the time of renewal. - so what might have been covered one year, may not be covered in subsequent years.

If there is no clause excluding engine fires then I think you have an excellent case to challenge the insurers.

 

[Steve L]

Hi John & Dusty.

They have seen a solicitor and were told to get the repairs done (estimated 2K)and to hire a 4X4 in the mean time. He phoned the insurers and informed them the he had been engaged to handle their claim and that there was no definition of fire in the T's & C's other than basic terminology "fire". So now the insurers face claims for the damage, vehicle hire, solicitors fee and emotional distress caused by the actions of the claim handlers at the insurance company.

For obvious reasons I can't be name specific or divulge specifics as now there is a case to answer via the legal system.

ATB Steve

 

[Dustydog]

Hi Steve

Glad to hear they are in good hands. I am sure their solicitor will see this through to a satisfactory resolution.

Please let us all know the final outcome.

Cheers

Dustydog

 

[ProfJohnL]

Likewise

 

[Steve L]

Ah the sweet smell of success.

After a strongly worded solicitor's letter to the insurers, a full appology was given, full repairs authorised, free landrover courtesy car with tow bar, plus

 

[Dustydog]

That's good news Steve.

Just a shame about all the rejected claims that weren't challenged.

From July this year all Insurers must publish how many repudiations they make, how many are challenged and how many they then have to pay.

Cheers

Dustydog