closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: Stolen watch - Insurance question

  1. #1
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    686

    Stolen watch - Insurance question

    Following on from my other thread in regards to my Sub & BLNR being stolen (by deception) while in Spain I have an insurance question if anyone can help.

    We have an Admiral Home insurance policy which has been ticking over for a couple of years, when taking out the policy I added my TT Sub Date to the insured items, they didn't ask for any details of the watch, serial number or proof it literally just states mens Rolex Submariner Date on the paperwork.

    The watches were stolen a few weeks ago and I only today remembered about this policy and the watch being listed, granted at the time it was the 16613 I was referring to but do you think I could still be covered for the 2020 Sub Date?

    I dont want to try and scam Admiral with a false claim but hoping that by switching watches throughout the policy (I have goldsmiths proof of purchase for the Sub) it wont affect it and I can at least try and claim some money back to soften the blow.

    Any advice would be appreciated on this, never been in the predicament (luckily) where I have needed to make a claim for a personal possession.

  2. #2
    Grand Master JasonM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    15,462
    The only snag I can see is that the policy predates the age of the 2020 Sub, its worth a go but it depends on how switched on they are I guess. If challenged then you can say with honesty that you have a Sub date insured and a Sub date you have lost. In the absence of specifics, you genuinely have a Sub date insured with them, possibly.
    Last edited by JasonM; 9th September 2020 at 15:36.
    Cheers..
    Jase

  3. #3
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Location
    Rotherham
    Posts
    478
    Should still be covered. I have insured a number of watches over the years and only once been asked for the serial number.

  4. #4
    You have insurance for a reason. Use it would be my suggestion.
    If they can find a way out paying fair enough but their's no harm in trying to recoup you're loss.

    Sent from my SM-N960F using TZ-UK mobile app

  5. #5
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    686
    Suppose it is worth a try, I will be honest and like you say what I have insured is what I have lost so fingers crossed!

    In regards to the policy being older than the watch I thought I would just say I simply upgraded to a newer Sub when one became available from my AD.

  6. #6
    Grand Master Onelasttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Everywhere, yet nowhere...
    Posts
    11,124
    Not sure what policy you have but why wouldn't you have listed the 2020 Sub Date when you bought it? Every policy I've ever had, including one with Admiral, required a list of personal items worth over a certain amount, and I normally have to specify cover outside the home and abroad.

    How is your BLNR covered with them?

    I would suspect that if they got wind you were claiming for a different watch they could feasibly cancel the whole thing and you'd get nowt. Tricky one.

  7. #7
    I wouldn't mention anything about age just claim for the watch and if they do come back at you about age then use the defence of it being an upgrade. After all it just says SUB watch no serial or age.

    Sent from my SM-N960F using TZ-UK mobile app

  8. #8
    Master blackal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Scottish Borders
    Posts
    5,858
    An interesting scenario.

    My thoughts have swung back and fore, but finally settled on this:

    If the watch is specifically mentioned in the policy, rather than just thrown into the general moveables in the house (like big TV, HiFi, Fridge-freezer, range cooker etc) - and not Ďdetailedí then I would have no issue claiming for its loss, on the basis that the watch to that value - has been included in the risk calculation and premiums paid each year.

    It of course would be easier if it was just listed as ďGentís stainless steel Rolex watch, value £5,000Ē

  9. #9
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    686
    Thanks for the info everyone.

    I had a quick chat with Admiral on their live chat and they said the watch should be covered. I didn't go in to all the details as I am waiting for the crime ref number but fingers crossed I can get some money back.

    Unfortunately the value is down as £6000 but not to worry as anything back is better than nothing.
    The policy simply states 'Mens Rolex Submariner' so I cant see there being a problem as that is what was stolen.

    I will keep everyone updated, hopefully a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel.

  10. #10
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    12,306
    You've been paying to insure a rolex sub, so can't see the issue, if admiral are of the same opinion then it sounds good, reality is they factor in named items, so as you hadn't removed it, had a similar watch bought, it should be as covered as the first.

  11. #11
    Iíd personally be shocked if they donít ask for serial number and proof of ownership
    That way they can ďownĒ the watch should it reappear
    Itís why I keep boxes etc separate in case of issues


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Grand Master JasonM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    15,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweepinghand View Post
    Iíd personally be shocked if they donít ask for serial number and proof of ownership
    That way they can ďownĒ the watch should it reappear
    Itís why I keep boxes etc separate in case of issues


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Absolutely they will, the question was, will they notice its not the Sub that was originally insured a few years earlier, in the absence of them asking for those details originally, I suspect not.
    Cheers..
    Jase

  13. #13
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Hertfordshire
    Posts
    2,530
    Blog Entries
    1
    Another point of interest is, further to the OPs comment about it only being a 6K payout, whether it is underinsured. If it was determined that it is, they could choose to void the policy or possibly instigate an 'average' clause. This means that if an item was worth, say, 12K but only insured for 6K and thus insured for only 50% of its value, they could elect to pay out only 50% of the 6K figure (ie 3K) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condition_of_average

  14. #14
    Master Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    South Yorkshire
    Posts
    1,287
    Blog Entries
    1
    When they will ask for proof of ownership, and you will show a receipt dated later than the original contract, they should stop the process.

    It will be interesting to see what happens, wish you luck.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by JonRA View Post
    Another point of interest is, further to the OPs comment about it only being a 6K payout, whether it is underinsured. If it was determined that it is, they could choose to void the policy or possibly instigate an 'average' clause. This means that if an item was worth, say, 12K but only insured for 6K and thus insured for only 50% of its value, they could elect to pay out only 50% of the 6K figure (ie 3K) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condition_of_average
    The average clause means heíll get 6k instead of 12k.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Franco View Post
    When they will ask for proof of ownership, and you will show a receipt dated later than the original contract, they should stop the process.

    It will be interesting to see what happens, wish you luck.
    This. The watch stolen isnít the insured watch. Date of purchase and insured value on your schedule donít match the watch you are claiming for. This is likely to be picked up as the claim progresses. I think you need to be absolutely honest up front. If not, isnít there a risk this could be perceived as an attempted insurance fraud?

  17. #17
    Craftsman ozzyb123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    London
    Posts
    742
    All you need to do in this situation is stick to the facts.

    Youíre insured for a Rolex submariner and you lost a Rolex submariner. Let the insurer stress about the details. Your main worry should be if the 2020 purchase price was over your insured value. In which case you are underinsured. In some cases this can void the claim.

    Personally I think youíll get some dosh. Good luck, let us know how it goes.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    Grand Master Onelasttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Everywhere, yet nowhere...
    Posts
    11,124
    The main lesson is, if you do buy a £7.5k watch, notify your insurer and get it listed straight away.

    I'm surprised the OP was so blase about this?

    EDIT: I've just read the backstory and realise the OP lives in Spain rather than "…popped off on holiday …". My point about the insurance still stands.
    Last edited by Onelasttime; 10th September 2020 at 13:15.

  19. #19
    Master blackal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Scottish Borders
    Posts
    5,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Onelasttime View Post
    The main lesson is, if you do buy a £7.5k watch, notify your insurer and get it listed straight away.

    I'm surprised the OP was so blase about this and even popped off on holiday without first checking if his watches were covered?
    And...... here comes the condemnation.......

  20. #20
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    12,306
    He's not exactly getting away with anything, it's up to the insurer to check the validity of the claim, he has a generic rolex submariner insured, no specifics captured on file, he sold one, bought one, so for me is covered.

    Worst case the insurers come back and say the claim isn't valid, which adds a claim to his policy and leaves him in the same position as he is now pretty much.

  21. #21
    Grand Master Onelasttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Everywhere, yet nowhere...
    Posts
    11,124
    Quote Originally Posted by blackal View Post
    And...... here comes the condemnation.......
    I did that earlier. The mind boggles though

  22. #22
    Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Hertfordshire
    Posts
    2,530
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    The average clause means heíll get 6k instead of 12k.
    ....it was an example - I don't know the value of his lost watch - but if it was worth 12K and he had it insured for 6K he would only get 3K

    Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

  23. #23
    Grand Master sundial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    15,087
    Quote Originally Posted by GC2012 View Post
    Thanks for the info everyone.

    I had a quick chat with Admiral on their live chat and they said the watch should be covered. I didn't go in to all the details as I am waiting for the crime ref number but fingers crossed I can get some money back.

    Unfortunately the value is down as £6000 but not to worry as anything back is better than nothing.
    The policy simply states 'Mens Rolex Submariner' so I cant see there being a problem as that is what was stolen.

    I will keep everyone updated, hopefully a little bit of light at the end of the tunnel.
    Quote Originally Posted by vortgern View Post
    This. The watch stolen isn’t the insured watch. Date of purchase and insured value on your schedule don’t match the watch you are claiming for. This is likely to be picked up as the claim progresses. I think you need to be absolutely honest up front. If not, isn’t there a risk this could be perceived as an attempted insurance fraud?
    Don't assume on the basis of your 'live chat' that the insurance company will pay the claim. Two entirely different items ... one declared and one one not declared. Read the small print of your insurance policy ... specifically the terms and conditions documenting high value personal possessions all risks and whether or not they need to be declared as individual items and if they are covered when you are abroad. If the claim is allowed and you are deemed to be under-insured, then the 'average' rule would almost certainly be applied. You have an obligation to advise your insurer of any increase in the value of personal possessions. The insurance company will very likely request proof of purchase if they progress the claim. And consider the following ... If you had a car and it was insured and you sold it and bought another car without advising you insurance company ... and then damaged your new car or wrote it off ... Would you expect the insurance company to automatically pay a claim for your uninsured car ... just because your former car was insured by the company? Cars with values of maybe £6K and more ... similar to Rolex watch values.

    An insured person is legally bound to declare /divulge all material facts regarding insured items and claims ... an insurance contract relies on the doctrine of 'utmost good faith' ... Contravene this and policies could be deemed invalid ... and a claimant could face prosecution.

    https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d...tgoodfaith.asp

    I am a former insurance professional.

    dunk
    Last edited by sundial; 10th September 2020 at 12:40.
    "After a certain age you got the face you deserve I think" ... Henri Cartier-Bresson

  24. #24
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,787
    I havenít read the comments above ( too lazy), but is it theft if you give the watch to someone and then they fail to pay. I would have thought that would be fraud and perhaps your trust was misplaced.

    Devils advocate, but are you suggesting the insurer underwrite a decision to permit a fraudster to take your watches ?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  25. #25
    Grand Master sundial's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    15,087
    OP ... just read through your previous thread https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...25#post5524325. ... highly unlikely that your insurance policy covers this type of contingency . If you make a claim you should divulge everything . If you do not divulge everything and the claim is paid and the insurer subsequently discovers all the facts, you could face the serious consequences of making a false claim for the £'000s involved.

    dunk
    "After a certain age you got the face you deserve I think" ... Henri Cartier-Bresson

  26. #26
    Master blackal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Scottish Borders
    Posts
    5,858
    Quote Originally Posted by joe narvey View Post
    I havenít read the comments above ( too lazy), but is it theft if you give the watch to someone and then they fail to pay. I would have thought that would be fraud and perhaps your trust was misplaced.

    Devils advocate, but are you suggesting the insurer underwrite a decision to permit a fraudster to take your watches ?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I think youíre on the wrong thread, Joe?

    (A hazard of not reading all the comments )

  27. #27

    Stolen watch - Insurance question

    In a sense, if a fraudster took them w/o paying they still belong to the OP. If he then wonít return them arenít they stolen?

  28. #28
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,787
    Quote Originally Posted by blackal View Post
    I think youíre on the wrong thread, Joe?

    (A hazard of not reading all the comments )
    Oh, whoops.

    Or, as the speed checker would have it, ďwhipsĒ.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  29. #29
    Grand Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Lagoa, Portugal
    Posts
    11,090
    Blog Entries
    20
    Once this is done. Iíd switch to an insurer that covers unspecified valuables upto £15K per item/pair. But with a claims history I guess the premium will be high. Sorry for your losses OP.

  30. #30
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    686
    Thanks for the info everyone, I will ignore some of the more negative comments as not only are they irrelevant but I know fine well what I should have done, you learn from your mistakes.

    I will call Admiral and be 100% honest with them, at the moment I have 100% wrote off the watches and have my fingers crossed they might surface in years to come when they get returned to Rolex for a service etc so any kind of compensation right now is a bonus, even if it was £1000 its better than the £0 I am expecting!

    I will keep you all updated.

  31. #31
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,787

    Stolen watch - Insurance question

    Quote Originally Posted by Kingstepper View Post
    In a sense, if a fraudster took them w/o paying they still belong to the OP. If he then wonít return them arenít they stolen?
    I think he would still have title to the watches and is still legally the owner. The criminal fraudulently represented that a payment had taken place. I would need to check the Spanish definition of fraud as U.K. is slightly different.

    The seller didníít check they were cleared funds and irrevocable before releasing the property. He was deceived by an apparent fraudulent transfer ( the misrepresentation) and became a victim of a payment fraud.

    The seller could notify the bank that remitted the funds as they represent the proceeds of crime. Such a notification must be taken seriously by the bank.

    The funds might be considered as the sellers funds as they were transferred to him and fraudulently recalled. Worse case the bank can freeze funds and provide Police location information, support a civil recovery, etc.

    OP I wish you well recovering your property.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by joe narvey; 10th September 2020 at 20:12. Reason: I think Iím dyslexic, my spelling is rubbish

  32. #32
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    686
    Thanks Joe.

    My lawyer said this is 100% fraud, the moment he sent and then retracted the payment and started the long winded lies is when the transaction turned in to fraud. Black and white in his words so no problems on that front and once I get my crime number I presume they will state it is theft/fraud.

  33. #33
    Master blackal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Scottish Borders
    Posts
    5,858
    Well - itís all gone to rats now

  34. #34
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,787

    Stolen watch - Insurance question

    Quote Originally Posted by GC2012 View Post
    Thanks Joe.

    My lawyer said this is 100% fraud, the moment he sent and then retracted the payment and started the long winded lies is when the transaction turned in to fraud. Black and white in his words so no problems on that front and once I get my crime number I presume they will state it is theft/fraud.

    I wish you well with your claim but if you have insurance for theft, that describes an act where an item is taken without your consent and the thief has the intention to permanently deprive you of the item. It wasnít without your consent, you gave it to him in the understanding that you had received the funds. He represented he had paid you and then reversed it, this is the fraud.

    This is why Iím wondering about theft insurance ..


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by joe narvey; 11th September 2020 at 02:25.

  35. #35
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Sheffield
    Posts
    545
    I agree with Joe on this one.

    It is fraud and crime but the insurance company is unlikely to pay. The reasons below outline a. Policyholder is required to appropriately secure their property, you gave him the watches in good faith in return for payment.
    The insurance company is likely to repudiate the claim on the basis it was your responsibility to ensure funds are cleared.

    How exactly did he re-call the payment? In the U.K. and I would expect Spain too since itís EU wide regulated you cannot recall a faster payment (chaps on the other hand I think you can?)

    If a faster payment is sent fraudulently the sending bank contacts the receiving bank to stop the funds and return them after contacting the owner of that account.

    This goes outside the scope of this thread I suspect he spoofed you into believing a payment had been sent, when it had not.

    Also finally, your admiral insurance might be invalid if you donít declare you live outside the U.K? Some have exclusions if your home Is empty for more than 28 or 60days.

  36. #36
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    13,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean89 View Post
    How exactly did he re-call the payment? In the U.K. and I would expect Spain too since itís EU wide regulated you cannot recall a faster payment (chaps on the other hand I think you can?)
    My bank have told me Faster Payments and CHAPS cannot be recalled unless fraud is claimed and even then they would speak to me first. BACS can be recalled. Sometimes what looks like money in pending is actually a standing order which can be cancelled and reversed too.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information