Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
yeahyeahwhatever
12 Dec 09 17:37
Joined:
Date Joined: 27 Sep 03
| Topic/replies: 9,750 | Blogger: yeahyeahwhatever's blog
Last year Barclays charged me 90 for contents insurance, but this year they want 184!

Just been on those insurance comparison sites and not one will insure me because we "live within 40ft of a water-course". Now what annoys me is that we've lived in this house for the last 14 years, and this is the first year we've ever had a problem getting insurance - they obviously changed the maps or something! It's made worse by the fact that our house is at the top of the hill, and the stream (and a piddly one at that) is a good 15ft below the bottom of the hill - and we (or anyone else in the street) has never experienced flooding!


Eventually find directline who will insure us, but the policy is full of warnings aobut "have you ever been refused insurance". So, what exactly constitutes being refused insurance? surely there has to be more to it than being refused on those comparison sites?

ta
Pause • Switch to Standard View what's the legal definition of...
Show More
Loading...
Report V4 Vendetta • December 12, 2009 5:39 PM GMT
I don't think there is a legal definition as it requires evidence that all insurers have refused. The reason it's gone up is that everyone else rushed to take out insurance and they have to charge more now because of the concentration risk. The companies are sitting with a lot of flood risk they can't offload, so up goes the price.
Report wur • December 12, 2009 5:43 PM GMT
I you've no chance of being flooded, get a policy that excludes flood cover.
Report punterfleecer • December 12, 2009 6:05 PM GMT
I live at the bottom of a hill and my water pressure is terrible i.e. slow
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com