Insurance offering vouchers instead of cash settlement

[Patchelicious]

I find it highly unlikely that the partner stores will have some of the specialised tools that a bike shop will have. 

 

You have your IceToolz tool box stolen, you can "replace" it with inferior quality tools from their partners. Limiting someone's choice does not put them back in the same place as before the theft. 

 

Thats like saying, we will replace your car but you can only chose from these dealers. soz...

Sure, but you cannot just come out and says its BS.

[Patchelicious]

He uses his own discretion.

Should not be a problem?

 

Half a post would have had me at utter BS.

 

This buddy buddy **** irritates me to no end.  If I don't want to buy at your "partner stores" then I don't want to.  

 

Good to know it is Momentum.

 

Time to move both my car insurance policies.

Thanks for the heads up.

If you agreed to the policy wording, then afterwards when it comes claim time, one moans, the BS part sits with the policy holder.

 

Read your policy docs BEFORE you agree. 

[Vetplant]

Very happy in that case then with my insurer. Have always had cash settlements for my claims.

[Pure Savage]

Sure, but you cannot just come out and says its BS.

 

It is BS.

 

Next your wife's wedding ring is stolen, you get a voucher for American Swiss only. Sorry this practice of partner stores is utter BS. 

[Patchelicious]

ps: What does your broker say about this?

[Pure Savage]

Very happy in that case then with my insurer. Have always had cash settlements for my claims.

Same had cash settlements even though after some back and forth. My latest claim for caravan was the most painless.

[Patchelicious]

It is BS.

 

Next your wife's wedding ring is stolen, you get a voucher for American Swiss only. Sorry this practice of partner stores is utter BS. 

 

If your contract says they will only pay cash then its is BS.

 

But if you agreed to a contract that says they will replace your wifes wedding ring with a voucher from American Swiss, then its NOT BS.

[Pure Savage]

Generally your wording will state something like:

 

Repair, replace or pay cash or any combination there of.

 

Usually a claims card is issued, similar to a MasterCard debit card  if the item is not replaced by the insurer,

Have very similar wording in my policy. I dont take that to mean, we can force you to use X,y or Z. supplier. I dont care how they do it, as long as get back to the same position as before.

[Pure Savage]

If your contract says they will only pay cash then its is BS.

 

But if you agreed to a contract that says they will replace your wifes wedding ring with a voucher from American Swiss, then its NOT BS.

AGREED

[WR 1.0]

Have very similar wording in my policy. I dont take that to mean, we can force you to use X,y or Z. supplier. I dont care how they do it, as long as get back to the same position as before.

I did not include that it also usually has the..... Through a supplier of our choice clause.

 

But there are always exceptions to the rules. Example : If you bought a ring from Tiffany's, they can't really give you a charge card. They could try and get a ring made through a manufacturing jeweller but the reason you went to Tiffany's is due to the workmanship, etc. So a cash settlement would be Treating Customers Fairly (which is the current buzz word in the market)

[Robbie Stewart]

I have a special brand of hatred reserved solely for insurance companies, after I got schnaaied by Budget Insurance / Dial Direct when I bought a new car for the missus.

I had just finished paying my own car (Mazda Etude Sportwagon) off, and bought the missus a new Polo. This was in 2010. My Mazda was comprehensively insured, as required when buying on HP. Anyway, Budget quotes me a stupid amount for the Polo, and I declined, and decided to go with another co.

 

When they got wind of this, all of a sudden they lower their quote, and offer me insurance for both cars at less than the other co. Stupidly, I fall for it.

 

Fast forward 3  months. I crash the Mazda. No biggie, I got insurance. Call them, they come assist and salvage me. Get called the day after - "Sorry sir, you aren't insured for the damage." "WHAT???..." "Yes sir, you are only covered 3rd Party for the Mazda...we will pay for the recovery, but the damage is not covered."

After a long and protracted fight, I lost the money to repair the car, and then had to sell it to recuperate my losses.

I now have a broker, who knows I will come sort his knee-caps out if I ever get schnaaied like this again, seeing as I told him as much. He is very accommodating and obliging when I call him, which is not very often. I now have a yellow umbrella covering all my goodies, including my bikes.

 

I will happily pay way more for that service, and get the help I want when I need it, than settle for this "cut out the middle man BS" ever again.
 

[Sitting@89]

The free market will sort this out quickly, if an insurer keeps doing this soon no one will use them.

[Edge_Design]

I did not include that it also usually has the..... Through a supplier of our choice clause.

 

But there are always exceptions to the rules. Example : If you bought a ring from Tiffany's, they can't really give you a charge card. They could try and get a ring made through a manufacturing jeweller but the reason you went to Tiffany's is due to the workmanship, etc. So a cash settlement would be Treating Customers Fairly (which is the current buzz word in the market)

 

Then it's up to you to argue that it isn't the same product. A VW isn't a BMW just because it has 4 wheels and an engine. I don't think the insurer will argue that. But their responsibility is to give you another equivalent ring - not to give you the purchase price in cash.

 

In this specific case, if their partner stores don't sell the products that were stolen/insured then you obviously have a case - if they sell those products and they've given you a voucher for the correct value then you are just wasting everyone's time. You must just go and get the replacement for the tools/parts that were stolen. If you decide to flog them on the hub then you're welcome to but your insurer has done their job.

[Patchelicious]

The free market will sort this out quickly, if an insurer keeps doing this soon no one will use them.

And the regulators.

[Grebel]

With the amount of insurance fraud going on nowadays it is no wonder that insurance companies have resorted to credit type arrangements with partner stores. 

 

HOWEVER as a client I just want to be put back in the same position that I was in before the loss (Minus the cost of the excess if it applies) 

 

If this does not happen then that is where my monthly broker fees kick in...

 

After a claim a few years ago, I was chatting to the insurance replacement specialist that was appointed of the claim. Back then, the assessor was the one that recommended the type of settlement. If there was no foul play suspected then depending on the type of claim, you either got cash or credit at an insurance replacement specialist (Peoples lifestyles change aver time and your stolen handycam and cybershot could easily be replaced by a new DSLR with video) .

 

If there was some doubt as to the legitimacy of your claim, they replaced your stuff like for like with no option of swapping out.

[rorydewet]

Some years back, our house was broken into and my camera equipment was stolen.  

 

Santam settled the claim with a 'credit card', which could be used anywhere (with certain 'partner stores' offering discounts).  I ended up buying groceries with the card for months, as I replaced the photography equipment by buying second hand (privately).  

 

I understand why they don't want to give cash, but if you need to replace by buying privately (i.e. need to pay cash), they at least need to give you the option of using the card / vouchers pretty much anywhere.  

 

Having to buy cycling gear at Sportsman's or Makro would seriously suck.  

they dont need to give you option of buying anywhere

 

they need to replace what was stolen put you back in position you were before loss

 

as to how they do that its their choice

 

and the bottom line is read the document