Just been burgled

[Damo]

Sorry to hear about your burglary, hopefully the insurance pays out ok....

[sundial]

To the OP

I suspect your biggest hurdle is that you were downstairs whilst the burglar entered an upstairs window via a flat roof.

I would advise your to read your exclusion clauses. About 50% of insurers will not pay for a claim if the window was left open / unlocked in a room that was unoccupied and that applies even if you were in the house whilst it happened.

So if you where in the lounge watching TV and you left an upstairs bedroom window open for ventilation, they probably will not pay up if you admit that that was how they entered. This comes under the clause of not taking reasonable care of leaving small and valuable items in an unoccupied room that is not secure.

I have these clauses in my insurance and I keep every door and window locked in unoccupied rooms all the time.

Also check whether jewellery should be kept locked in a safe, this is also a common get out.

I hope it all goes well, no one deserves this sort of thing.r

I concur with this … it's the insured's responsibility to ensure that windows are locked and not left open. Open windows do not enable a 'forced entry' … they're an invitation for an 'unforced entry' which could be an excluded risk in the policy wording. And all windows should be fitted with insurance company approved locks. This should all be documented in the small print of the insurance policy. Insurance companies will only pay claims in accordance with the policy … and will exclude any claims where the policy terms and conditions are contravened. Regarding the expression 'get-out' … insurance companies will usually help their policy holders and try and ensure that they are fully covered by drawing the insured's attention to the policy's terms and conditions. If an insured does not comply with the policy's conditions the the claim is invalid. I'm a former insurance professional.

Your first port of call should be the police - especially as another dwelling has also been burgled. Forensics science and technology might be able to help identify the intruder. From your description sounds as if you might have some video footage which could assist a police investigation?

And it's sensible to have a secure safe installed. One of our forum members has a home security business … used to be based in High Barnet.

dunk

[eagletower]

I concur with this … it's the insured's responsibility to ensure that windows are locked and not left open. Open windows do not enable a 'forced entry' … they're an invitation for an 'unforced entry' which could be an excluded risk in the policy wording. And all windows should be fitted with insurance company approved locks. This should all be documented in the small print of the insurance policy. Insurance companies will only pay claims in accordance with the policy … and will exclude any claims where the policy terms and conditions are contravened. Regarding the expression 'get-out' … insurance companies will usually help their policy holders and try and ensure that they are fully covered by drawing the insured's attention to the policy's terms and conditions. If an insured does not comply with the policy's conditions the the claim is invalid. I'm a former insurance professional.

Your first port of call should be the police - especially as another dwelling has also been burgled. Forensics science and technology might be able to help identify the intruder. From your description sounds as if you might have some video footage which could assist a police investigation?

And it's sensible to have a secure safe installed. One of our forum members has a home security business … used to be based in High Barnet.

dunk

Police were here last night, foresics here today but they saw the footage with the gloves so didn't bother dusting for prints.


I am going to get in touch with Marcj about the safe- he fitted the locks in my house too.

[sundial]

This the bit that worries me . Insurance companies trying to wriggle out of paying . However at most it was unattended for 20 minutes if that. Kids had been bathed , they came downstairs to say good night where I was watching TV and sister who stayed over was also upstairs but had come downstairs to get a drink .

Window was open but I’ll argue leaving open for 20 mi utes at most doesn’t count for leaving unattended .

Insurance companies do not 'wriggle out of paying' … they pay claims in accordance with the policy terms and conditions … and if those terms are contravened, even if only for 20 minutes, they are still contravened. However, if the insurance company refuses a claim, any insured party can seek the opinion of e.g. an independent claims assessor.

You might consider advising the local jewellers and watchmakers in your area (e.g. Antique and Modern in East Barnet) just in case the thief tries to sell the items. Most jewellers have security cameras which can identify customers.

You appear to have the correct insurance company approved locks … which is a plus. A friend has recently had to replace all his dwelling's door locks and window locks in order to comply with his insurance company's recommendations and policy wording.

dunk

[Mick P]

This the bit that worries me . Insurance companies trying to wriggle out of paying . However at most it was unattended for 20 minutes if that. Kids had been bathed , they came downstairs to say good night where I was watching TV and sister who stayed over was also upstairs but had come downstairs to get a drink .

Window was open but I’ll argue leaving open for 20 mi utes at most doesn’t count for leaving unattended .

Well you could argue but you would lose. As far as the insurance company are concerned, 20 minutes is adequate time for a theif to walk in, search the place and walk out. Just remember, most break ins take less than 10 mins.

However, if the OP or his partner was asleep in the bed when the break in occurred, then they would have complied with the conditions.

[theylive]

Very sorry to hear about your mum. As for the theft, I’ve suffered this myself... traumatic, but you’ll all get over it given time.

One tip - if forensics dust for fingerprints clean off the powder as soon as they leave. I didn’t and suffered the consequences, because it’s nasty stuff that only gets harder to remove.

Having been robbed in 1998 I still have items with the silvery forensics dust showing as, a thorough cleaning wasn't done at the time. Sorry to hear of your loss.

[Chris_in_the_UK]

Sorry to read this - best of luck in sorting things out.

[eagletower]

I know the road well and sorry to hear. Very odd for a lone guy to just be wandering down there having a look about?! Must have had balls of steel as there's no quick exit.

Btw OP as this is on the open part of the forum you might want to remove the road name.

Thanks just have. He came out and walked left towards the A1 so I can only assume he must have had a car parked down there as the road is over 1.7 miles down to just there.

[reecie]

Sorry to hear that. Had the same thing happen to me a couple of years ago. The Barnet OWL emails have a depressing regularity of burglaries in them.

[eagletower]

Sorry to hear that. Had the same thing happen to me a couple of years ago. The Barnet OWL emails have a depressing regularity of burglaries in them.

I get those emails as well as the ones from Nextdoor.co.uk and you’re right, depressingly regular break ins or car thefts.

[Templogin]

A truly depressing read. I am fortunate to live in low crime Shetland, where houses and cars are still left unlocked, where expensive plant machinery is left at the roadside overnight, and is still there in the morning. A stolen pushbike or mobile phone may be news on the local radio station. Crime-free it isn’t, but the rare ostentatious car will still be on the drive in the morning, and it has nothing to do with security lights, cctv, alarms, garage mines etc., it is because perpetrators are known by the community and are remembered for their transgressions as long as they remain here.

If people thought that their picture and address details were going to be published, I am sure that there would be much less crime on the UK mainland. Instead we live in a skewed society where the criminal automatically gets victim status.

[stevecross]

Insurance companies do not 'wriggle out of paying' … they pay claims in accordance with the policy terms and conditions … and if those terms are contravened, even if only for 20 minutes, they are still contravened. However, if the insurance company refuses a claim, any insured party can seek the opinion of e.g. an independent claims assessor.

dunk

They certainly ensure the odds are stacked in their favour though, such as small print stating various clauses and then you have to pay in many cases an excess before making a claim. I only discovered the other day that these people can get out of paying if you put something on Facebook that indicates you are not at home and you get burgled.

[Barrisimo]

Yes, I remember that now. There’s been a bit of a spate in Arkley.

Bit worrying I am in Arkley also! Sorry to hear of the loss OP but the main thing is nobody was harmed.

[markrlondon]

If people thought that their picture and address details were going to be published, I am sure that there would be much less crime on the UK mainland.

I regret to say that I think that, for many, it would become a badge of honour.

Instead we live in a skewed society where the criminal automatically gets victim status.

Too true, it very often seems.

[sundial]

They certainly ensure the odds are stacked in their favour though, such as small print stating various clauses and then you have to pay in many cases an excess before making a claim. I only discovered the other day that these people can get out of paying if you put something on Facebook that indicates you are not at home and you get burgled.

We're getting a little 'off topic' here but insurance companies have to 'stack the odds in their favour' in order to survive and be able to pay claims. 'Excesses' help prevent claims which cost more to process than the actual claim value. Insurance is essentially a 'pooling of risks' … the pooling of the premiums of many, to pay the claims of a few … and even insurance companies have to limit their direct claims payouts by reinsuring their risks above certain limits. Insurance companies have to meet or better their budgeted loss ratios in order to survive. Insurance claims fraud is a continual battle especially for fire and flood damage. More than a few people know claimants who like to boast about how they e.g. falsely claimed for a new carpet when e.g. their washing machine overflowed. These people are responsible for insurance premiums rising and for claims being vetted very closely. Insurance companies do not get out of paying claims … they will normally pay any valid and bona fide claim. However, obviously fraudulent claims have to be 'nipped in the bud' by insurance claim professionals. Unfortunately too many claimants think that insurance companies are a 'gravy train'; such claimants try and take advantage and try to 'rip off' the insurance companies … if they succeed it's Joe Public who in effect pays their claim by virtue of resultant and necessary increased premiums. Those who work in the insurance industry are very aware of this battle. Some people think that insurance companies should not make profits - but those profits are an essential part of the international 'money go round' whereby e.g. pension funds invest in insurance companies (and other financial institutions) in order that we can enjoy our retirements.

BTW … insurance policy £excesses can be recoverable if the loss is due to negligence of a third party … in which case the claim can be made to the third party's insurers (if they are insured) or directly to the third party … and the claim can be made either by the insured or his/her insurance company.

dunk

[TROYBOY79]

sorry to read this thread mate but I would advise that the insurance company will try every trick in the book to get out of this one due to the variables.
Also have a good reason for the wife not wearing her rings as theyll be onto that like a shot!!

[sundial]

sorry to read this thread mate but I would advise that the insurance company will try every trick in the book to get out of this one due to the variables.
Also have a good reason for the wife not wearing her rings as theyll be onto that like a shot!!

You're too suspicious and have no real idea about how insurance companies operate. All insured parties have a contract of insurance based on the policy wording - and insurance companies pay claims in accordance with that contract. There are no 'every trick in the book' exercises or excuses … the terms and conditions are all documented for anyone to read. And it's up to all policy holders to ensure they have adequate cover, take all reasonable steps to prevent losses, and read their policy wordings and insurance contracts.

dunk

[Ivan Drago]

My house was broken into in Feb and to be honest I cannot fault the insurance company.

They paid out on every item and even when I didn't have receipts photos of items were accepted as proof of ownership.

If your claim is legit you have nothing to worry about they will pay out for what you have lost.

[bwest76]

I checked my policy with my company today.

My camera and IWC watch are listed and covered separately on the policy.
My doors meet the lock standards as do my windows.
I declared changes like conservatory roof and shed.
I asked about windows left open while I am in the house,any and all windows can be left open.
But obviously locked when out.
All calls are recorded and I’ve been upfront so I feel insured as best I can be.

[eagletower]

sorry to read this thread mate but I would advise that the insurance company will try every trick in the book to get out of this one due to the variables.
Also have a good reason for the wife not wearing her rings as theyll be onto that like a shot!!

I’m not sure how to justify that , but she doesn’t wear her rings unless she goes out as it’s too much hassle taking them on and off , I don’t wear my wedding ring too.

Beyond the rings and watches and a few bits of jewellery in a safe she doesn’t have anything else , the thief took some costume jewellery which wasn’t valuable thinking it was . Thankfully the little valuable jewellery she has was in the safe.

We must have disturbed him coming back up , I’ve gone through our time line and now the CCTV and there would only have been a window of less than ten minutes and he was in and out in 4 minutes so I think we must have disturbed him.

[eagletower]

So far insurers have been great, have asked to send in crime ref, proof of ownership of items gone and any CCTV . They’re very quick to act .

I’ve never been burgled before so have never had items replaced. From what I have read here when I get paid out it will be vouchers .

We’ve owned 5 Rolexes and all of them have been bought used from the classifieds here bar one.

So I’ve never bought a brand new one.How easy is it to buy my milguass and my wife’s date just? - she had a mother of Pearl , with Roman numerals on the jubilee bracelet .

Are waiting lists on most Rolex very long? Is there anywhere I could order the replacements fairly quickly?


From what I’ve read insurers tend to send out vouchers to the value of watch, I appreciate they have no control over waiting lists but what goods vouchers to a shop that has limited supply?

The rings were made by a jeweller in Cockfosters , ideally we’d like him to make an exact copy - do list insurers pay out for this or will it most likely be vouchers again?

Once again thank you to everyone for their kind messages .

[sundial]

Pleased to hear the 'open window' appears to be covered by your policy … Good luck with your claim and hope all settled to your satisfaction asap

Discuss any claims queries e.g. the rings replacements with your insurer … only you and your insurer know what's in the policy wording and how they settle up.

dunk

[Tom-P]

From what I’ve read insurers tend to send out vouchers to the value of watch, I appreciate they have no control over waiting lists but what goods vouchers to a shop that has limited supply?

I've posted on this several times in the past but you are not obliged to accept vouchers, despite what they will try to tell you in the first instance. What tends to happen is that you will be told you will be reimbursed in vouchers; you should then say that constrains you and that you would prefer cash; they will then say that they can pay you in cash but that the sum will be reduced. At that point you can mention the Ombudsman (and the ruling I'll dig out for you shortly), at which point they'll back off and offer you the voucher amount in cash.

[eagletower]

I've posted on this several times in the past but you are not obliged to accept vouchers, despite what they will try to tell you in the first instance. What tends to happen is that you will be told you will be reimbursed in vouchers; you should then say that constrains you and that you would prefer cash; they will then say that they can pay you in cash but that the sum will be reduced. At that point you can mention the Ombudsman (and the ruling I'll dig out for you shortly), at which point they'll back off and offer you the voucher amount in cash.

Thanks Tom, that would be great.

=

[Tom-P]

Thanks Tom, that would be great.

See my post 13 on this thead:

https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...r-watches-with

- for chapter and verse.

[gaurav_tzuk]

Unfortunately in this heat a lot of people forget to close windows. Sorry to hear about your troubles op but you’re safe so onwards and upwards.

Assuming that’s Arkley (North London) you live in?

[gaurav_tzuk]

If it’s like for like policy would the insurer source the watches for you by any chance ?

So far insurers have been great, have asked to send in crime ref, proof of ownership of items gone and any CCTV . They’re very quick to act .

I’ve never been burgled before so have never had items replaced. From what I have read here when I get paid out it will be vouchers .

We’ve owned 5 Rolexes and all of them have been bought used from the classifieds here bar one.

So I’ve never bought a brand new one.How easy is it to buy my milguass and my wife’s date just? - she had a mother of Pearl , with Roman numerals on the jubilee bracelet .

Are waiting lists on most Rolex very long? Is there anywhere I could order the replacements fairly quickly?


From what I’ve read insurers tend to send out vouchers to the value of watch, I appreciate they have no control over waiting lists but what goods vouchers to a shop that has limited supply?

The rings were made by a jeweller in Cockfosters , ideally we’d like him to make an exact copy - do list insurers pay out for this or will it most likely be vouchers again?

Once again thank you to everyone for their kind messages .

[eagletower]

Unfortunately in this heat a lot of people forget to close windows. Sorry to hear about your troubles op but you’re safe so onwards and upwards.

Assuming that’s Arkley (North London) you live in?

Yep that’s the place .


I just don’t think anyone closes windows when you’re up and down the house and inside it.

Different story to going out with the window open.

[eagletower]

If it’s like for like policy would the insurer source the watches for you by any chance ?

That would be easiest and my preference

[wileeeeeey]

See my post 13 on this thead:

https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...r-watches-with

- for chapter and verse.

When my father in law was burgled the insurer offered £8k in vouchers or £2k in cash and he took the cash. Could he have argued for the 8k? From memory I think the vouchers were H Samuel who don't even stock Breitling which is why he went for the cash. I remember him saying to them on the phone it isn't possible to spend £8k in H Samuel and they just said that's their policy etc.

[jameswrx]

What a shame he didn’t fall off the roof and break his neck!

if it makes you feel any better, the entire downstairs of my house was cleaned out whilst I was wide awake upstairs. It happens.

My best mate’s Mum n Dad’s place was cleared out of antiques while they slept. It was a real old place with low ceilings and the crazy thing was they even took the grandfather clock which was all but wedged in place. The clock actually had part of the top removed to get it under the ceiling it was that tight and they still managed to get that out without waking anyone! The clock was in the room directly below where they were asleep at the time too!

[Tom-P]

When my father in law was burgled the insurer offered £8k in vouchers or £2k in cash and he took the cash. Could he have argued for the 8k? From memory I think the vouchers were H Samuel who don't even stock Breitling which is why he went for the cash. I remember him saying to them on the phone it isn't possible to spend £8k in H Samuel and they just said that's their policy etc.

Emphatically he could (have argued for the £8k, if that was their estimation of the settlement owed). See the material in the link I've posted above. The Ombudsman has unambiguously ruled against the practice of offering less settlement for cash than vouchers, but many companies still try to do this since it manifestly saves them a lot of money.

I speak from direct personal experience on this. I was offered a settlement in vouchers but (as in your father's experience) they were at shops in which I didn't want to spend the money. I wanted the payout in cash. I spoke to a friend who knows about these things, and who advised me that this could be challenged, spent a little time online establishing the reg/s, and wrote to challenge my insurer. They first tried to say that this was their standard policy; I then insisted on talking to a manager; he then told me that I was quite right, that I shouldn't have been told I would receive less in cash than vouchers, that this was an error on the part of a junior employee etc. Right ... it's obvious anecdotally that companies regularly try this, knowing that only a small percentage of claimants will challenge them on it. Though I am doing my best to increase the size of that percentage ...

But can I clarify the numbers in your post? £8k vouchers vs £2k cash seems an inconceivable difference. From memory I think I was offered something like 10-20% less but nothing like that.

[Ellgal]

That would be easiest and my preference

If you search out my comment above, you’ll see that there is (or certainly was a few years ago when I was in the industry) a supply chain in place for this type of thing.

If you insist on cash settlement (as the poster above says, you def can-mention TCF before you use the FOS), you’ll be at the mercy of the pricing agreed between the supplier and the insurer (less than RRP).

People assume cash is king but the supply chain is almost always the best option in contents claims such as this. Regardless of how good a complainer any PH thinks they are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[eagletower]

In an ideal world I would love it if my insurer could source the replacement watches.

Even if they source vouchers or cash I am at the mercy of a dealer and waiting lists for Rolex.

[wileeeeeey]

Emphatically he could (have argued for the £8k, if that was their estimation of the settlement owed). See the material in the link I've posted above. The Ombudsman has unambiguously ruled against the practice of offering less settlement for cash than vouchers, but many companies still try to do this since it manifestly saves them a lot of money.

I speak from direct personal experience on this. I was offered a settlement in vouchers but (as in your father's experience) they were at shops in which I didn't want to spend the money. I wanted the payout in cash. I spoke to a friend who knows about these things, and who advised me that this could be challenged, spent a little time online establishing the reg/s, and wrote to challenge my insurer. They first tried to say that this was their standard policy; I then insisted on talking to a manager; he then told me that I was quite right, that I shouldn't have been told I would receive less in cash than vouchers, that this was an error on the part of a junior employee etc. Right ... it's obvious anecdotally that companies regularly try this, knowing that only a small percentage of claimants will challenge them on it. Though I am doing my best to increase the size of that percentage ...

But can I clarify the numbers in your post? £8k vouchers vs £2k cash seems an inconceivable difference. From memory I think I was offered something like 10-20% less but nothing like that.

It might have been £6k in vouchers but I'm sure it was £8k. It was a two tone Breitling chronograph he bought in the early 90's and it wasn't cheap then. I did think the difference was quite a lot but he didn't have a receipt and it was left on a kitchen counter when they got in via a cat flat turning the key which left in the back of the kitchen door and he was just happy to get something for it as we all assumed he wouldn't get a penny (no box, papers or receipt due to age).

[T1ckT0ck]

So sorry to hear about this OP and I wish you all the best in getting it resolved.

Our local got broken into last week. They guy wandered around downstairs for just under two hours, had had taken his socks off and put over his hands, hoodie zipped up to avoid the NINE cctv cameras which he did extremely well. The landlady and son were upstairs, he moved the furniture (tables and chairs) to barricade the only door just in case she came down. He even sat down and rested at one point. He left and re-entered the pub multiple times. He ended up missing the police by 12 minutes. One little girls cancer treatment charity box stolen (he removed her photo from the tub and left it) and the small change container from the fruit machine.

I was stunned at how brazen it was, I always thought they get in and out as quickly as possible.

It's made me readdress and I programmed the 'part set' feature of our alarm for night time use.

[sundial]

Police were here last night, foresics here today but they saw the footage with the gloves so didn't bother dusting for prints.


I am going to get in touch with Marcj about the safe- he fitted the locks in my house too.

You might consider asking the police if they've considered investigating any window cleaners operating in your locality … window cleaners have first hand knowledge of dwellings with potential easy access.

dunk

[Thewatch1]

Thieves are horrendous the sheer audacity to enter someone's home is frightening as they must be prepared for confrontation. Thank God no one was hurt. Sorry about your watches very painful

Sent from my Redmi Note 7 using TZ-UK mobile app