Stolen outboard - insurance question.

[longjohnsilver]

I had an outboard in for a service, the firm have just contacted me to say they were broken in to last night and my engine, along with many others, was stolen. They will give me a crime number to claim on my insurance.

My question is, should it be me claiming on my insurance or the firm who were doing the servicing on their insurance?

 

[pvb]

I'd expect them to claim, so you receive the full value, don't have to pay an excess, and don't lose any no claims bonus.

 

[Easticks28]

Explain the situation to yur insurers and let them sort it out.

 

[duncan99210]

Ouch. I have a nasty suspicion that buried somewhere in the terms and conditions of the company (which you’ve probably never consciously seen or noticed) that they’ll disclaim any responsibility for such things as theft. Hence their suggesting that you claim on your insurance. I’d talk to your broker and ask them for advice before submitting a claim. Might also be worthwhile talking to local trading standard people about unfair terms and conditions?

 

[mjcoon]

I'd expect them to claim, so you receive the full value, don't have to pay an excess, and don't lose any no claims bonus.

Especially if your insurance does not cover you when your property is in the charge of someone else (which would be a fun argument!)...

 

[Seastoke]

Then name and shame

 

[longjohnsilver]

Then name and shame

No, definitely not. The owner of the business is a good guy and who I consider to be a friend. He’s got nothing to be ashamed about, the thieves are the culprits.

 

[mainsail1]

You will probably find that the Company is not liable for the theft unless you can show they were negligent. You should claim on your own insurance.

 

[Fantasie 19]

No, definitely not. The owner of the business is a good guy and who I consider to be a friend. He’s got nothing to be ashamed about, the thieves are the culprits.

If that were the case for me, I'd have a chat with him, tell him I was confused (which is my normal), and ask what the situation is and why I have to claim rather than him.. I expect it's what one of the others above said.. small print, or a stipulation on his insurance ,or something like that...

 

[ashtead]

If you are in the business of servicing outboards it’s not unreasonable to have insurance for items in your care. Much the same as horses being left in livery suffering injury. If you look up there is law on theft of items from a tradesman of items in their care although a quick call to your insurance broker to discuss would be my suggestion initially to notify .

 

[Davy_S]

I find it hard to believe that he does not have insurance in place to cover exactly such events, or fire, surely the customer should not have to claim on his own insurance policy (what if he had none) this means that anyone placing an item in someones care (for repair or servicing) could face the same problem for any type of goods, cars, tv, white goods, etc.

 

[Graham376]

Ouch. I have a nasty suspicion that buried somewhere in the terms and conditions of the company (which you’ve probably never consciously seen or noticed) that they’ll disclaim any responsibility for such things as theft. Hence their suggesting that you claim on your insurance. I’d talk to your broker and ask them for advice before submitting a claim. Might also be worthwhile talking to local trading standard people about unfair terms and conditions?

Agree with what you say but, was a copy of terms and conditions given to OP? Did he sign to agree them? I would expect a trader to have insurance cover for customer's goods in his care.

 

[Refueler]

I would not approach broker or own insurance until absolutely sure about the Service Guys cover. Why ? They have a nasty habit of 'increasing premiums' or wriggling out ...

If as OP says - he's a good guy and a friend ... why not have a chat with him over a beer and get full story / details .... BEFORE approaching broker.

 

[mainsail1]

When you give your property to someone to work on it they are a Bailee for reward. They have a duty to take reasonable care of your property. They do not have a strict liability for it. If the stolen outboard was in locked premises overnight and the thieves forced entry then the repairer has probably taken reasonable care. He has no liability for your loss except as a goodwill gesture to a customer. You should claim on your own Insurance and they will pay based on what the terms of the policy state. Very often there is no increase of premium on a marine policy for one claim such as this.

 

[Sandy]

No, definitely not. The owner of the business is a good guy and who I consider to be a friend. He’s got nothing to be ashamed about, the thieves are the culprits.

If it is the same business that I've heard about via Starcross FCC the owner is the salt of the earth.

 

[bedouin]

Ouch. I have a nasty suspicion that buried somewhere in the terms and conditions of the company (which you’ve probably never consciously seen or noticed) that they’ll disclaim any responsibility for such things as theft. Hence their suggesting that you claim on your insurance. I’d talk to your broker and ask them for advice before submitting a claim. Might also be worthwhile talking to local trading standard people about unfair terms and conditions?

Such a term would be unreasonable so unenforceable

There is no doubt that the O/B was in the care of the service company and so they are liable for anything that happens to it - they cannot put anything into their terms and conditions to limit that liability.

The O/P cannot rely on his own insurance as that might place restrictions on how/where it is stored etc that he cannot guarantee were met.

 

[Graham376]

Such a term would be unreasonable so unenforceable
There is no doubt that the O/B was in the care of the service company and so they are liable for anything that happens to it - they cannot put anything into their terms and conditions to limit that liability.

I think you're wrong there, it's many years since I retired from business but, IIRC, terms and conditions can avoid liability for loss or damage to property.

 

[Chris_Robb]

I think you're wrong there, it's many years since I retired from business but, IIRC, terms and conditions can avoid liability for loss or damage to property.

They can put what they like into the terms and conditions, but if you are not shown them, or they daont draw your attention to them, the with a consumer, the Unfair Trade Terms clause is there fore every one to use.

 

[bedouin]

I think you're wrong there, it's many years since I retired from business but, IIRC, terms and conditions can avoid liability for loss or damage to property.

It is much harder to do now than it was a few years ago with all the recent changes to consumer protection.

Any such condition would have to be clearly visible and/or pointed out to the OP at the time at which the contract was made, and would still require the repairer to take adequate steps to protect the property. Relying on a clause half way down the second page in your standard terms and conditions that they OP hadn't read anyway isn't enough these days.

 

[Refueler]

It is much harder to do now than it was a few years ago with all the recent changes to consumer protection.

Any such condition would have to be clearly visible and/or pointed out to the OP at the time at which the contract was made, and would still require the repairer to take adequate steps to protect the property. Relying on a clause half way down the second page in your standard terms and conditions that they OP hadn't read anyway isn't enough these days.

I have to agree in essence ... Consumer Rights are vastly different in just last few years ....