Hello Friends,

I had bought a TV insurance from BigWarranties for protection from accidents ( cracked screen ). Unfortunately when I went to make claim, they said that their T&C excludes screen cracking from projectiles.

Just wanted to find out if it is common to have this kind of exclusion in TV insurance plans which cover accidents.

Thanks

They started putting tho exclusion in when the Wii came out. Kids and controllers sliping out there hands etc. Its quite common

Thanks SgtBush, I tried looking at T&C of TV care plan of Currys, John Lewis, AO and Argos. None of them have this exclusion.

Can you tell me a few such TV care plans which have such exclusions. Also what is Wii

Dont know of insurances personally, I dont have them. I'm insured thru contents policy.

The game console Wii

Depending on excess on your Home Contents, see if that covers the damage.

I had this TV insurance only, Nothing else.

I am trying to find if other TV care plans have such exclusions. I want to mention in my complaint that the sales agent should have mentioned this exclusion as it is so uncommon.

I bought car insurance as a tenant.

I deliberately drove my car into a lake when I realised I was in fact a landlord.

My insurers are refusing to replace my 1996 banger with a brand new Aston Martin Vantage, quoting their terms & conditions.

Is it common that not reading the T’s & C’s and then being surprised when their claims are denied for a common (and reasonable!) exclusion .....

You will have had at least 14 days from purchase to get and read the policy documents, to ensure it was suitable for you, and to cancel penalty-free if it wasn’t.. The exclusion is reasonable (and, as another contributor has mentioned) was bought in after lots of cases of screen damage from projectiles where adequate care wasn’t being taken (in the case mentioned, the Nintendo Wii, where controllers are waved around vigorously and can end up being hurled at the screen if the advice to use the restraining straps isn’t followed).

Your insurers would have had to ensure this was sufficiently brought to your attention at the point of sale, this is an uncommon exclusion. Did they ?

Did you throw the item, what was the item ?

Their website has a link to their Ts & Cs, projectiles are mentioned under what isn't covered, point no 9.

https://bigwarranties.co.uk/product-tv

HB

Their website has a link to their Ts & Cs, projectiles are mentioned under what isn't covered, point no 9.

 

https://bigwarranties.co.uk/product-tv

 

HB

Direct link to the T's and C's: https://bigwarranties.co.uk/documents/Appliance_Terms.pdf

The example of Wii controllers has been cited earlier in the thread. These are more explicitly covered under point 17, wheres point 9 could cover them (generically) but fits more with balls and toy gun projectiles (Nerf darts and so on)

Direct link to the T's and C's: https://bigwarranties.co.uk/documents/Appliance_Terms.pdf

 

The example of Wii controllers has been cited earlier in the thread. These are more explicitly covered under point 17, wheres point 9 could cover them (generically) but fits more with balls and toy gun projectiles (Nerf darts and so on)

You're right the policy does define if it was a Wii controller or similar, what it's not strong at is stating a projectile has to be thrown, so if you kicked your shoe by mistake, that is neither a projectile nor thrown.

I'm assuming it wasn't a Wii by the Op's response.

Having the wording online isn't bringing the unusual exclusion to the policyholders attention.

Having the wording online isn't bringing the unusual exclusion to the policyholders attention.

True. However, we don’t know if there was (as is common practice from the last few insurances I’ve taken out!) a comment made at point of sale along the lines of “you will get a copy of the policy documents. You need to read these carefully to ensure the cover is what you need. If not, you can cancel this policy with no charge within 14 days....” (& then a warning you can’t cancel the policy if you make a claim first, and so on).

If the exclusion is reasonable and the policy holder is pointed to it (and the policy documents), it can stand.

I bought car insurance as a tenant.

 

I deliberately drove my car into a lake when I realised I was in fact a landlord.

 

 

 

My insurers are refusing to replace my 1996 banger with a brand new Aston Martin Vantage, quoting their terms & conditions.

 

Is it common that not reading the T’s & C’s and then being surprised when their claims are denied for a common (and reasonable!) exclusion .....

 

 

 

You will have had at least 14 days from purchase to get and read the policy documents, to ensure it was suitable for you, and to cancel penalty-free if it wasn’t.. The exclusion is reasonable (and, as another contributor has mentioned) was bought in after lots of cases of screen damage from projectiles where adequate care wasn’t being taken (in the case mentioned, the Nintendo Wii, where controllers are waved around vigorously and can end up being hurled at the screen if the advice to use the restraining straps isn’t followed).

So bazza, did you get your Aston Martin in the end?

How many miles to the gallon do you do in town?

Thinking of doing the same thing

 

 

 

So bazza, did you get your Aston Martin in the end?

How many miles to the gallon do you do in town?

Thinking of doing the same thing ������

No, sadly, they didn't give me the Vantage. I'm holding out for a Buggati, though.

As for the mpg ; if you can afford to buy/maintain / insure that sort of car, are you bothered by the mpg?.