Am I being conned by my bike insurance company?

[Rudi Pollard]

As others have already stated, you are not insured for normal wear and tear, which means that there needs to be an insurable event(Accident of some kind). Chain suck which can be attributed to worn parts does not fall under this definition, so if that was indeed what caused the damage, they are fully within their rights not to pay out the claim.

[Skubarra]

Noob question - how would chain suck make a hole in a frame? I can understand scratching but it must be some vicious chain suck to break your frame? 

[HBO]

Let me guess, you are insured with King Price?

 

First of all, bicycles are insured on an All Risk basis. That means every kind of event/ incident is covered. The only exclusions will be wear & tear/ deterioration or any damage caused on purpose. I have no idea what a chain suck is, if you can explain this I might be able to assist more.

 

secondly, the onus is always on the client to prove his claim. You do this by submitting an affidavit of what happened plus a damage report from the LBS to confirm with a quotation to repair/ replace. If the insurer say you are lying and that the damage was caused over time or not according to your statement, then obviously the onus is on them to prove the same. This will be a report/ opinion from an expert and assessors/ claim managers are not experts. A report from the manufacturer will suffice.

 

Thirdly, a claim can be defined as a single/ sudden/ once-off event. If a chain suck is a single/ sudden/ once-off event, I can't see why they can repudiate your claim. As said earlier, I have no idea what a chain suck is and I'm no mechanical/ technical expert, but how can a hole sommer just appear in a carbon frame?

 

Also, if an insurer repudiates your claim, they must quote a clause from the policy wording that supports their repudiation. I.o.w. if they claim the damage to be due to wear and tear, they must quote the clause/ exclusion in your policy contract that states the same. It will be interestingly to know what their reason is and what clause they quote.

 

What is also important to know is that it is not always necessary to know when the damage occurred/ event took place and/or what the specific event/ incident was. You can submit a claim with reason "unknown" but then you must have substantial proof to proof that whatever the possible cause is, or that whatever you claimed to what might have happened is very likely and beyond any doubt. Whatever you/ LBS states as the possible cause must obviously also be consistent with the damage.

[BigDL]

Now if this happened to me the first thing I would have done was to phone my broker, who would have told me that the bike was damaged during normal use, and that he never heard anything about chain suck / poor maintenance from me, nor my bike shop (and he would have subsequently deleted the email with the bike shop assessment in it as well).

 

Same with the car analogy, he would have asked me (read told me) that the side shaft broke after impact, not before, to avoid any confusion as to who will be paying for the claim.

 

And that people, is why you need a good broker

Nice, so you are comfortable that a) your broker will advise you to lie, steal and commit fraud and b) that you will do it.

 

That is pretty shocking.

[KingTJ]

I've double checked my policy and nothing here says anything about an event? The event here was I dropped my chain under load (even if this is not ideal practice) which then resulted in the damage.

If it is wear and tear...then they dont have to pay but of it is an accident they are obliged...

[Zatek]

.

Edited February 27, 2017 by Zatek

[Patchelicious]

I don't read all the post but here is my 2c.

 

If you drop your chain and causes damaged that is not wear and tear but an accident.

 

Lodge a appeal and take it further.

 

This is one of the reasons why I am with ousurance. They are not cheap but they replace the entire bike and claims are approved with 6 hours.

Maybe read all the posts first then, especially considering that some guys who are very educated on insurance and have the correct qualification to comment here, have.

[eddy]

I don't read all the post but here is my 2c.

If you drop your chain and causes damaged that is not wear and tear but an accident.

Lodge a appeal and take it further.

This is one of the reasons why I am with ousurance. They are not cheap but they replace the entire bike and claims are approved with 6 hours.

If they replace the entire bike when someone has a mechanical, I am pleased that I am not in the same risk pool as you. Someone has to pay for it, and it is your fellow policy holders

[RocknRolla]

.

Edited February 27, 2017 by RocknRolla

[GLuvsMtb]

Nice, so you are comfortable that a) your broker will advise you to lie, steal and commit fraud and b) that you will do it.

 

That is pretty shocking.

In case you missed the (i.e. Its tongue in cheek) here it is again

I contact my broker before claiming to ensure that there is no ambiguity as to whether an incident is claimable or not. He also makes sure that if something is insurable and it is economically prudent to insure against it, that I am aware of the insurance and understands under what circumstances claims will be refuted. Take the side shaft example earlier. If it was a car out of motor plan, you would be able to insure for mechanical failure with an after market product.

Edited February 27, 2017 by GLuvsMtb

[Pure Savage]

I don't think anyone is trying to commit insurance fraud here, I hope. But if you have a fall which damages the frame, don't report it as, one day I looked down at my frame and it was cracked.

 

You need to say, when I was trying to mimic Chris Froome on the down tube I ploughed into a field, hence the issue.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Formallyknownas]

Ja. This is a goodie boys. A tit mix of chaps on this thread.

[WR 1.0]

Next time anyone complains about how much they have to pay for insuring their bikes, just point them to this discussion. the premiums of many, pay for the (valid) claims of a few

[100Tours]

A few thoughts

 

1. There is no such thing as 'insurance' for your bicycle. You can insure yourself against bicycle theft (out of your house or garage), or hijacking, or accidental damage, or other incidents, but at the end of the day you are taking a specific and defined set of bets against your insurance company that various incidents will not happen. If those happen then you get paid - but they are carefully defined and one of the defined events actually has to happen. That is what the claims guy is assessing. The more specific you make your bet the cheaper it is. The more claims they let through that don't exactly meet the terms of the bet they took, the more expensive the cover becomes.

 

2. Insurers will generally only cover you for accidents or events that happen suddenly (like it rained so hard that the wall collapsed). Anything that happens over any significant period of time is defined as wear and tear (like rising damp..) and you can safely assume you'll never have cover for that on any policy.

 

That's likely what the ombud would tell you, and the onus is on you to prove that this was an accident. In this case it sounds like the bike shop report will say that there are a number of worn out components related to (or very near to) the damage on the frame, and the claims assessor will conclude that if these components had not been worn then the damage would not have occurred.

 

3. It is worth having a good broker (not for the reasons mentioned above - not many brokers will walk that line, at least not for long), but insurance for your home and goods can be pretty complex and a decent broker will help you navigate this. Short term insurance is highly nuanced - the little variations in the terms of your cover make policies more competitive. Especially if they're trying to get to super cheap insurance - i.e. you do largely get what you pay for here, and there's a lot of complexity in what you're actually buying.

 

Also worth noting that the costs of doing business through a call centre are not much different to the costs of having a broker. 'Cut out the middle man' is usually no more than a marketing ploy.

[BigDL]

In case you missed the (i.e. Its tongue in cheek) here it is again

I contact my broker before claiming to ensure that there is no ambiguity as to whether an incident is claimable or not. He also makes sure that if something is insurable and it is economically prudent to insure against it, that I am aware of the insurance and understands under what circumstances claims will be refuted. Take the side shaft example earlier. If it was a car out of motor plan, you would be able to insure for mechanical failure with an after market product.

Came across very differently.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[cyclenut]

On T'c & C's - for anyone using "Specific" CYCLEinSURancE have a look at the requirements for securing your bike to a rack (be it on a car or a trailer) ... a 12mm chain ..... yip- it will be heavier than your bike and capable of doing damage whilst placing and removing .... just make sure you remove it before travelling - vibration will destroy your frame/rims.  

There's an option of a 12mm cable but it must have an integrated lock.