Is it an urban myth that insurers refuse..

[PeteMorris]

I suspect that the wording is; in fact; the same as, or similar to, the wording on my policy:

 

“at or near the declared address between 10 PM and 6AM, and are not within a locked garage, they shall not be covered for theft or malicious damage.”

 

 

So I can go to the cinema, or stay away from home etc. without any problem.

 

So you'd be quite happy for it to be nicked with no claim possible if you stayed away from home? I wouldn't be happy with wording like that! Either it's covered for theft or not! I'd be wanting the latter for sure!

[frededwards]

I think you misunderstand, If my vehicles are at (or near) my home address, they have to be in the garage between 10PM and 6AM or the theft/damage cover is invalidated.

 

This means that I can park them on the drive, or outside the house during the day but not overnight.

 

If they are away from home the garaging clause does not apply.

 

It really isn’t a problem.

[PeteMorris]

I think you misunderstand, If my vehicles are at (or near) my home address, they have to be in the garage between 10PM and 6AM or the theft/damage cover is invalidated.

 

This means that I can park them on the drive, or outside the house during the day but not overnight.

 

If they are away from home the garaging clause does not apply.

 

It really isn’t a problem.

 

Ah....I see....but it's slippery wording in my view. Thanks for clearing up my misinterpretations of it.

[Stranza]

I have a business insurance and one of the lads who works for me left one of my vans at the top of our road as he said he could not get it in the yard,the van was broken into and some tools stolen from the van,when I asked the insurance company to pay out for the loss they refused saying that I had stated on my policy that the vans would be stored overnight in our yard,what annoyed me was I could have said it was in my yard,me like a mug being honest told them it was parked up the road,any excuse to riddle out of paying and insurance companies will

That answers my question, I understand why the locked yard is preferred by insurers but it is a bit heavy handed to penalise you after all you paid to cover you in the event of a loss so nit picking because it is slightly outside a time frame is likely to encourage us to fib!

 

the police will deal with parking if it's 'obstruction'

 

if somebody is having difficulty getting a car up there, what chance has an ambulance or fire engine got?

 

and yes, I have seen a police officer ticketing a car fairly recently, for obstruction

I have been sorely tempted Strix the only thing stopping me is I know the neighbour had been out of work for a couple of years before we moved here and he only got this supermarket delivery job at Christmas I would hate for him to get the sack for it if they contacted his work. The van has been hit twice already so it may happen regardless.

The fella and his wife aren't the neighbourly type or I would try and drop it in conversation.

 

Bolded: Not anymore. Every quote I've had in the last 5-6 years, selecting garaged over driveway has come out more expensive. Several of my friends have also found this. When I enquired about this with an insurance rep on a motoring forum I belong to he said that "it changed because if the car is in a garage and it's(the car) broken into, the garage provides cover from being seen by anyone. On a driveway

the chance they'll be seen is greater therefore the opportunity is less appealing."

Could it be down to area? I did live on the Manor before so insurance was always steep.

Maybe they thought if you had a garage on the Manor you were security conscious, they weren't to know I lived on the posh bit

[Resident]

 

Could it be down to area? I did live on the Manor before so insurance was always steep.

Maybe they thought if you had a garage on the Manor you were security conscious, they weren't to know I lived on the posh bit

 

Doubtful that it's down to area, I have friends scattered across the country.

[gym_rat]

The onus is on the insurers to prove it. Its feasible that they would investigate to see if the car owner actually had a drive and that it was usable, but unlikely. They'd have to have some pretty solid evidence to refuse to pay out, and the insurance ombudsman would side with the owner if there was none.

 

so lying on the proposal form isn`t grounds to refuse payment?

[francypants]

I suspect that the wording is; in fact; the same as, or similar to, the wording on my policy:

 

“at or near the declared address between 10 PM and 6AM, and are not within a locked garage, they shall not be covered for theft or malicious damage.”

 

 

So I can go to the cinema, or stay away from home etc. without any problem.

 

I wouldn't be happy with the wording of this policy either. I would need it clarifying and put in writing of their definition of ' near the declared address '

Just how far away do they class as near ? Too vague for me.