Castle Cover

[MonkeyLobster]

Hi, everyone.

 

A few months ago it seems that my mother may have thrown out jewellery totalling about £9k.

 

She hadn't been wearing them as they reminded her of her previous marriage, which had been unhappy.

 

She has been trying to claim it on her insurance, but the insurance company are refusing to pay.

 

I can see that her policy covers losses of valuables up to £10k with a single item limit of £2k.

 

None of the items were named on her policy, as none of them were worth more than £2k.

 

It's my understanding that anything below this doesn't need to be named.

 

Could someone please confirm if this is correct, as the insurance company is saying they should have been named?

 

Thanks in advance

[dx100uk]

you are correct

 

dx

[MonkeyLobster]

Thanks for the reply, dx.

 

So my mum is entitled to claim then?

 

If they are being belligerent, what steps can she take to get the money she's entitled to?

[dx100uk]

go on to iplayer

 

the program this morning with Dom little

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01g89vg/Dont_Get_Done_Get_Dom_Series_6_Hays/

 

dx

[unclebulgaria67]

If you go over to the Martin Lewis Insurance forum, the person who appeared on the Dom Littlewood, has a thread with details of the battle they had with under-insurance related to jewellery.

 

But having said this. I cannot see how the OP's mother can make a claim for a deliberate act. If she threw away the jewellery, she cannot expect the Insurers to pay out. If it were an explainable accidental loss and she has accidental loss cover, then she may have a chance.

[Feebee_71]

Uncle Bulgaria,

 

The way I read the OPs post, it's not that his mother deliberately threw out the jewellery more that she put it out of regular sight due to the memories invoked and connected to it. At some point after this she has had a general clear out and the jewellery (in whatever container it was stored in) was cleared out accidentally.

 

Some further time on again the fact the jewellery is missing was discovered and by working through things it's realised that it must have been disposed of during the previous clear out.

 

If that's not the general gist of what happened I apologise but sometimes you have to read between the lines of what is said in a post!

 

Feebee_71

[MonkeyLobster]

Thanks for the replies, UncleB and FeeBee.

 

My mum doesn't have accidental loss cover, but the standard cover she has only mentions that she wouldn't be covered for loss of valuables left out in the open, and these items weren't. FeeBee's description is of what happened is correct.

[unclebulgaria67]

I can't see the loss being covered under a standard policy, if she has no accidental loss cover. Approach the Insurers with full details of the loss and see what they say.

[TSx]

On Castle Cover, providing they have accidental damage cover (no need for extended personal belongings cover) they will be covered for any loss within the home.