Garmin watch considered jewelry by insurers

[WR 1.0]

Unless their wording specifically states that you must specify all jewelry and watches, your garmin if stolen from inside your house should be covered. In general terms, if you turn your house upside down, everything that falls out is contents. 

The NFO (Ombud) should rule in your favour if it ends up there (in my opinion)

Ps. Garmin refers to Fenix, etc as Smartwatch 

Edited September 25, 2025 by WR 1.0

[dave303e]

Also with Outsurance, we have all gps watches as out and about insurance, bikes also fall under there.
The odds of your watch being stolen while out riding not while at home is the logic what they explained to me when we set up the policies.

 

Also if you read the description of out and about they mention portable electronic devices. Which a garmin fits perfectly in.

But fight it, with Insurance you must fight everything. 

[RobynE 🚵‍♀️]

44 minutes ago, dave303e said:

Also with Outsurance, we have all gps watches as out and about insurance, bikes also fall under there.
The odds of your watch being stolen while out riding not while at home is the logic what they explained to me when we set up the policies.

 

Also if you read the description of out and about they mention portable electronic devices. Which a garmin fits perfectly in.

But fight it, with Insurance you must fight everything. 

By their logic you should be wearing all your wearables and jewelry while riding your bicycle outside of your home address in order to qualify for a claim for any of those items? 

Imagine all the rands and cents they’re getting each month through forcing this “logic” on all their clients - and then not paying out. 

[Shebeen]

On 9/24/2025 at 8:00 AM, Mike Dewing said:

I’m 100% sure that if I do the research and back up my argument, possibly insinuate going further, I see there is an ombudsman for insurance disputes I reckon they’ll pay out for it.. just doing the research first.. 

anyone has any procedural advice or anything to use as precedence please share..!

I went the ombud route for a claim on a vibrocrete wall that was leaning over. An independant guy cleared them with info that I disputed (he did mention that my best move would be to push the wall over, and then it becomes an incident!!!).

but it was a decent process, you seem to have some decent ammo and they might cave very quickly

[dave303e]

8 minutes ago, RobynE 🚵‍♀️ said:

By their logic you should be wearing all your wearables and jewelry while riding your bicycle outside of your home address in order to qualify for a claim for any of those items? 

Imagine all the rands and cents they’re getting each month through forcing this “logic” on all their clients - and then not paying out. 

It is additional coverage to cover the additional risk. Out and About means you can claim for an incident that happens anywhere. Not just outside the home.

What if the watch was stolen with the bike on a ride? Would OP have claimed or not?

Why would you insure and item under home contents when you literally only use it outside the home while riding or running where the risk to the insurer is substantially higher.

This is why they force these items to be insured in a specific way with additional costs, because how do you differentiate a garmin watch that is only worn at home vs a garmin watch that is worn outside the home like on bike rides or as a watch. I would not trust a client at all if they said the garmin watch will only be at home and if it is stolen while out riding they would not claim.

I have had lots of discussions with them and took a while to understand and realise why it is in place.
I have a bike that is stuck on an indoor trainer and never ever leaves the house. They were so adamant it goes under out and about insurance because it is a bicycle. People will insure a bicycle under home contents because it is a lot cheaper rate, but the risk is so much higher because that cheap rate is based on electric fences, secure properties and alarms dropping the risk profile.

Eventually I understood their side and had to make the decision to either pay extra for out and about because of the nature of the item. Or to have it not covered. Replacement value is nearly nothing and no one would steal a bike with no wheels so it was an easier decision for me.

[Sandro]

Thats absolute ***, it was stolen inside your house so it doesn't matter if it was specified or not. It falls under contents. Speak to someone there with an IQ higher than 70 and you'll be fine I'm sure.

[ct_rider]

13 hours ago, Leedupreez said:

First wait for letter of repudiation the report them to the ombudsman. National Financial Ombudsman. https://nfosa.co.za/short-term-ombudsman-landing/

I was going to advise the same! Alternatively, since they so proud of their insurance ombudsman stats, maybe put them on terms to advise of your intention to challenge the repudiation of your claim with the short term insurance ombudsman. I'm sure they will revert to cover your claim. If they decide to only cover a portion thereof after they initially repudiated your claim, I would still proceed with the ombudsman to claim the full amount of your claim. 

[CARANXCycleMobile]

#OUTSURANCEMUSTFALL 🤣

[Sandro]

2 hours ago, dave303e said:

It is additional coverage to cover the additional risk. Out and About means you can claim for an incident that happens anywhere. Not just outside the home.

What if the watch was stolen with the bike on a ride? Would OP have claimed or not?

Why would you insure and item under home contents when you literally only use it outside the home while riding or running where the risk to the insurer is substantially higher.

This is why they force these items to be insured in a specific way with additional costs, because how do you differentiate a garmin watch that is only worn at home vs a garmin watch that is worn outside the home like on bike rides or as a watch. I would not trust a client at all if they said the garmin watch will only be at home and if it is stolen while out riding they would not claim.

I have had lots of discussions with them and took a while to understand and realise why it is in place.
I have a bike that is stuck on an indoor trainer and never ever leaves the house. They were so adamant it goes under out and about insurance because it is a bicycle. People will insure a bicycle under home contents because it is a lot cheaper rate, but the risk is so much higher because that cheap rate is based on electric fences, secure properties and alarms dropping the risk profile.

Eventually I understood their side and had to make the decision to either pay extra for out and about because of the nature of the item. Or to have it not covered. Replacement value is nearly nothing and no one would steal a bike with no wheels so it was an easier decision for me.

But this comes down whether you want the item covered only at home or also while you're out? My Garmin Fenix was stolen from my house a few months and it wasn't specified but because it was stolen on the property, they paid me out.  I realise its not covered outside my home but to me I'd rather self insure as the premium isn't worth it. Are you saying they force you to specify else there is no cover at all?

[Guest Mike Dewing]

3 hours ago, dave303e said:

Also with Outsurance, we have all gps watches as out and about insurance, bikes also fall under there.
The odds of your watch being stolen while out riding not while at home is the logic what they explained to me when we set up the policies.

 

Also if you read the description of out and about they mention portable electronic devices. Which a garmin fits perfectly in.

But fight it, with Insurance you must fight everything. 

Yeah still gonna fight it.. the internal business policies can’t contradict a government institution like SARS.? 
 

if they only cover jewelry and electronic devices on out and about then sure, but don’t lie to me and says it’s jewelry when it’s clearly not.. 🤷🏼‍♂️🤣 and when it’s stolen from right next to where my airpods and spyderco pocket knife.. they paid out for both.. 🥵

[RobynE 🚵‍♀️]

4 hours ago, dave303e said:

 

Why would you insure and item under home contents when you literally only use it outside the home while riding or running where the risk to the insurer is substantially higher.

 

I insure it because it’s mine and it should be covered whether it’s in my bedside drawer, on the roof of my car or down a drain. 

By their logic and now your logic - you’d be happy to not have a claim if your Garmin watch was stolen from next to your bed while you slept? 

[dave303e]

47 minutes ago, RobynE 🚵‍♀️ said:

I insure it because it’s mine and it should be covered whether it’s in my bedside drawer, on the roof of my car or down a drain. 

By their logic and now your logic - you’d be happy to not have a claim if your Garmin watch was stolen from next to your bed while you slept? 

My Garmin is insured under out and about insurance, which is meant for items that leave the home regularly like rings, phones, bicycles. It is not insured under home contents insurance for items that stay in the home permanently like the bed and the fridge.

My Garmin can get stolen anywhere and I will claim, because it is insured to be used almost anywhere. Including next to my bed while I slept. 

 

The same logic applied - I won't claim my stolen car from my home contents insurance if it is stolen from the garage. Because it is a car and it has higher risks so it has it's own set of specific vehicle insurance I can claim from.

 

I don't understand how you assume my logic.

 

 

[Guest Mike Dewing]

1 hour ago, RobynE 🚵‍♀️ said:

I insure it because it’s mine and it should be covered whether it’s in my bedside drawer, on the roof of my car or down a drain. 

By their logic and now your logic - you’d be happy to not have a claim if your Garmin watch was stolen from next to your bed while you slept? 

Literaly my mother in laws mobile was unplugged and taken from next to her bed while she slept! .. didn’t come into our room because the door was closed.. I can only assume because the rest of the house if the door was closed to a room they didn’t seem to want to open it.. they also would have been met by an incredibly angry German shepherd.. maybe they knew about her and came in anyways.. 🤷🏼‍♂️ I just don’t know.. but the door stayed shut and my dog stayed very quiet 🙄

luckily my bicycle was attached to my smart trainer and all garmin devices on their mounts.. they don’t know about the half turn vibe to get them off🤣🤣.. so my varia mount was damaged but they didn’t get the varia off.. 

my platinum wedding ring, sure I’ve accepted the loss.. but saying a garmin smart watch is the same as a decorative celebratory ring made of precious metal is ludicrous.. 

Edited September 25, 2025 by Mike Dewing

[RobynE 🚵‍♀️]

1 hour ago, dave303e said:

My Garmin is insured under out and about insurance, which is meant for items that leave the home regularly like rings, phones, bicycles. It is not insured under home contents insurance for items that stay in the home permanently like the bed and the fridge.

My Garmin can get stolen anywhere and I will claim, because it is insured to be used almost anywhere. Including next to my bed while I slept. 

 

The same logic applied - I won't claim my stolen car from my home contents insurance if it is stolen from the garage. Because it is a car and it has higher risks so it has it's own set of specific vehicle insurance I can claim from.

 

I don't understand how you assume my logic.

 

 

I think Outsurance has completely skewed your perception of what insurance is or isn’t. 

Insurance should cover - end of story. It doesn’t matter where the item is at the time and you shouldn’t have to pay a premium to insure something for being able to take it out, but then at the same time not have it converted for theft at home. There shouldn’t be (and isn’t, with Old Mutual) a clause that says you are only covered if the item is in a specific place. 

Note: I am not expecting my insurance to cover my fridge stolen off the back of my bakkie. 

I am however expecting them to cover them my watch whether I’m mugged on the street or there are sticky (criminal) fingers in my home. 

 

[WR 1.0]

52 minutes ago, RobynE 🚵‍♀️ said:

I think Outsurance has completely skewed your perception of what insurance is or isn’t. 

Insurance should cover - end of story. It doesn’t matter where the item is at the time and you shouldn’t have to pay a premium to insure something for being able to take it out, but then at the same time not have it converted for theft at home. There shouldn’t be (and isn’t, with Old Mutual) a clause that says you are only covered if the item is in a specific place. 

Note: I am not expecting my insurance to cover my fridge stolen off the back of my bakkie. 

I am however expecting them to cover them my watch whether I’m mugged on the street or there are sticky (criminal) fingers in my home. 

 

Unless you have an asset all risk policy, you definitely need to specify items you want cover away from your risk address.